Dear Guest
Thank you for visiting! est189 will soon be closing its doors (do forums have doors?) please visit the following thread - (to wail & cry perhaps?)
https://www.est1892.co.uk/forums/showthread.php?p=4002484#post4002484
Thanjk you.
Paul.S
"We need to understand what an independent panel is. Yet the day before the hearing the FA are recommending certain punishment - it's not independent then."
Now talking again about Defoe and the hypocrisy of being chosen to play for England having received no charge.
Can you drop Ayre a text and tell him to pass a message on and tell Brendan to talk about not charging Rio for elbowing Torres so they could pick him for England, and taking Terry to Euros even though they knew he'd made a racist comment
I'm not making any sweeping statements. I'm pointing out how farcical the media reporting is.
Jesus, I take a few months break from this place and nothing changes. Everybody reads anything and everything into every word you say unless you write like a mathematician!
He doesn't like Rodgers - and clearly doesn't care who knows it.
Yeah. Unfortunately, he's got some supporting his view. Tune in at 7am to Talksport where he carries on his campaign to slate LFC, FSG, BR etc all because he got taken for a mug by some dude called Huang
After a day to reflect on this, I feel the PFA should actually step in and sue the FA on behalf of Suarez. I think that the arbitrary nature of this punishment (and of all punishments) is something against which the PFA should fight as all players should have a clear set of standards and disciplinary guidelines so that they can operate on the pitch with certainty and make decisions that impact their careers with an understanding of the consequences.
If the PFA looks at the largest bans in English history, you can see clearly that there is no standard by which the players can operate (other than don't do something stupid). That environment gives the FA leverage to make arbitrary, personal bans that violate the standards of objectivity in discipline. This includes performance enhancing drugs, testing, discipline, etc. Without PFA representation in this process, the representatives of the "owners" stand alone and players have no voice in the game's disciplinary structure.
The rules of football are strange; the players union has nowhere near enough power in my opinion. The PFA should be involved in more than money and when they see one of their members treated this way, they should step in without hesitation.
"Our legacy begets an excellence that surpasses the particulars of who produces it." -- David Carr
How much is going to hurt them financially though? How much do you fine Suarez for this?
Also isn't there something that stops clubs from fining over 2 weeks wages? Didn't City want to fine Tevez over 4 weeks but have to reduce it to 2 weeks?
If I was to rewrite the rules, I'd classify infractions and offences on the pitch, and have specific bans for each category. Upholds consistency and fairness and improves the quality and opinions of the FA. Prevents them from being questioned about bias and corruption. And perhaps an additional financial punishment on top of what the player's club had issued. Either a few hundred thousand, or a number of weeks/months of no pay whatsoever. Most fines footballers receive can be pulled out of the spare change in their pocket, but if you tell a player they won't be paid a single penny for a month if they do something like this, it acts as a much bigger deterrent than a ban and a few grand out of their wages.
Rome wasn't built in a day, but it wasn't built by the apprentice either.
Comment