-
-
Dont care what anyone says -if i was a professional footballer, the absolute worsty thing someone could do to me on the pitch would be to injure me or have a dangerous tackle on me. With that, I can't play for potentially months.
If someone is racist, as bad as it is, I can still play every week.
Spat at - doesn't hurt, wipe it off, carry on playing.
Bite - a scratch, at most.
Totally over the top analogy with biting. I'd have that any day, just dont slide into me two footed.Comment
-
You are right, we would probably be asking for a longer ban if it was an opposition player, and unashamedly so! It saddens the lack of loyalty we as a fan base are showing to a great servant of our club. He turns up and plays his heart out in every single game and has carried us all season. I disagree that he would unemployed in most other occupations, if someone is extremely good at their job, they make themselves invaluable and employers bend the rules to keep them. I'm not excusing what he did, and he has blackened the name of our club in this instance but his positive attributes outweigh the negative for me! In my opinion, he is irreplaceable ATM for, without CL. I think some need to get behind him and put YNWA into practice. YNWA
Comment
-
Its too simplistic to trot out the line 'Youll Never Walk Alone' all of us know what it means. No one is leaving him out to dry. But some of us are a little fed up with players antics. Its not just Luis, its professional football as a whole for me.
Plus I really dislike when others tell me how I should support the players and club.*Except Michael, who died.Comment
-
Been thinking about the ban and appealing....
We should agree with the length of the ban and ask for half of it to be suspended. 5 game ban and a 5 game suspended banComment
-
The problem really isn't that he got a 10 game ban. It is that in general it is to short bans for other things that happen on the pitch, like very dangerous tackles etc.
A very dangerous tackle should be a 15+ game ban and the player shouldn't get any wages during that time.
The players play so many games now that a 15+ game ban is only a few months ban and the opponent could easily be ruled out a much longer time.
Some tackles even deserves bans longer than one season.Stop the cyberhate
from now on I will skip talking about our finances. That is a promise and will save myself from looking like a 
Susan Black
Comment
-
Suarez ban too tough, says West Brom boss Steve Clarke
West Bromwich Albion boss Steve Clarke today claimed the 10-match ban imposed on Luis Suarez for biting Chelsea defender Branislav Ivanovic was too severe.
Clarke, who worked with the Uruguay striker at Liverpool last season, called on the FA to explain the punishment.
Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers yesterday accused FA of punishing “the man rather than the incident” and bizarrely claimed Prime Minister David Cameron had prejudiced the case by commenting.
The Reds had until noon today to appeal against the length of the ban and Clarke said: “There is no place for it (biting) in the game and he has been punished, rightly.
“But in my opinion the punishment is a little bit severe. I think it would be nice to get an explanation of how they got to 10 games.
“How did the independent panel come up with this figure of 10? That’s worth an explanation so everybody knows guidelines going forward. There was a similar incident seven years ago (with Jermain Defoe) that was dealt with by a yellow card, yet seven years later it’s a 10-game suspension. ”Thanks very much for beingComment
-
Is it that bizzare that he claimed Cameron prejudiced the case.
The Govt. were looking like they wanted to lock horns with the FA and instigate reforms. The PM comments. The FA appear tough. Govt sees FA are dealing with things and don't need to reform. FA keeps gravy train status quo.Football without Origi is nothingComment
-
Only a hour left too appeal
Source : radio in my van :Comment
Comment