Shola
15 years ago
5 years ago
2,708
European uppercuts are the real man's man, manly offense
Ninja
14 years ago
6 years ago
5,341
9 match international ban

4 month ban from all football activities.
King Luis
17 years ago
1 month ago
3,111
Not sure how they can give two separate bans? Would be surprised if that remains after appeal which will almost certainly happen id imagine
Ninja
14 years ago
6 years ago
5,341
Yeah, hopefully he appeals it and it gets upped.

It's only 2 months of the Spanish season he's going to miss.
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Seems a bit underwhelming for what is his 3rd offence.
Sears
13 years ago
7 years ago
633
9 match international ban

4 month ban from all football activities.


9 match international ban is acceptable, but he shouldn't be banned from playing with Liverpool (if he's even with us come the end of the summer).
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
9 match international ban is acceptable, but he shouldn't be banned from playing with Liverpool (if he's even with us come the end of the summer).


Why the fuck not?
Ninja
14 years ago
6 years ago
5,341
9 match international ban is acceptable, but he shouldn't be banned from playing with Liverpool (if he's even with us come the end of the summer).


He's not banned from playing with Liverpool. He's banned from football, because he bit someone. Whilst on a football pitch.
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Aye, I'm baffled why Liverpool fans think this is punishing Liverpool when it is in fact punishing the footballer.

If Liverpool choose to employ the footballer that is their own prerogative.
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
He can't train with Liverpool and he can't attend a football stadium during his ban
SpinSwimScream
14 years ago
1 day ago
1,598
Yeah its the player himself who is getting punished. It is irrelevant who he plays for.
SpinSwimScream
14 years ago
1 day ago
1,598
also didnt he get 10 games last time?
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
Yeah, but he didn't get a 4 month blanket ban last time
Telegram Sam
15 years ago
5 months ago
5,082
Premium
Aye, I'm baffled why Liverpool fans think this is punishing Liverpool when it is in fact punishing the footballer.

If Liverpool choose to employ the footballer that is their own prerogative.

Exactly.

This is fucking hilarious. What a stupid cunt. He deserved longer.
Sears
13 years ago
7 years ago
633


Because he wasn't playing with Liverpool?

Like Carragher says:

''This is an international tournament, a FIFA tournament, the biting incident is in a Uruguay shirt and it should be Uruguay and Luis Suarez who pay the consequences.''

Despite what some of ye have said, I'm as annoyed as any other Liverpool fan out there that he's bite someone again. I really thought he had turned a corner last season. But I'd much rather get bit by someone and have a few small non threatening marks rather than have my leg broken etc.

By no means am I trying to say what he did was OK, from my personal point of view the guy has serious problems and Liverpool would be better off trying trying to ship him off to Espana to Madrid or Barcelona, but now that he is banned for the first two months of the season we can't. And we're stuck paying him 200,000 p/w, even-though the crime he committed was in a different continent and a total different competition.

Punish him by all means, but Liverpool shouldn't have to bear the punishment as well. An international ban and a huge fine would have been sufficient in my eyes.

And absolutely no need to go tell me to jump off a cliff either. Everyone can play a keyboard warrior.
Ninja
14 years ago
6 years ago
5,341
Liverpool fans, never change. You're brilliant.
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Maybe it will make Liverpool think about who they are employing?

If I get arrested while on holiday, I don't get to fly back to England to go to work.
Telegram Sam
15 years ago
5 months ago
5,082
Premium
It's punishing the player, not the club. Liverpool choose to employ such a head case so they have to live with the consequences. A ban for international games for which is his THIRD biting offence would not have been enough.

Well done FIFA.
Sears
13 years ago
7 years ago
633
Yeah its the player himself who is getting punished. It is irrelevant who he plays for.


But won't Liverpool still have to pay his wages? I read in the paper that we could sack or even sue but I'm not entirely sure.
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
Because he wasn't playing with Liverpool?

Like Carragher says:

''This is an international tournament, a FIFA tournament, the biting incident is in a Uruguay shirt and it should be Uruguay and Luis Suarez who pay the consequences.''


The player bit someone so the player is banned. It's simple. Liverpool weren't fined when Suarez bit Ivanovic were they? So why would Uruguay be punished at all?
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
But won't Liverpool still have to pay his wages? I read in the paper that we could sack or even sue but I'm not entirely sure.


Pretty sure Liverpool can decide to not pay his wages, surely it's in every footballers contract that if they get a worldwide football ban, they don't get paid
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Liverpool could probably sack him if they didn't want to pay his wages.
SpinSwimScream
14 years ago
1 day ago
1,598
Liverpool arent being punished. The player is, he just happens to play for Liverpool. Its his 3rd bloody offence, in 3 different competitions. A blanket ban is the absolute right thing to do, although it should be either longer or take effect once the season starts seeing as about a month and a half of his ban he won't be playing anyway.
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
Liverpool games he misses:

Friendlies:
16 Jul Brondby (A)
19 Jul Preston (A)
24 Jul AS Roma (A)
28 Jul Olympiacos (A)
31 Jul Man City (A)
03 Aug AC Milan (A)
10 Aug Borussia Dortmund (H)

Season:
16 Aug Southampton (H)
23 Aug Man City (A)
30 Aug Tottenham (A)
13 Sep Aston Villa (H)
20 Sep West Ham (A)
27 Sep Everton (H)
04 Oct West Brom (H)
18 Oct QPR (A)
25 Oct Hull City (H)

Plus 1 or 2 league cup games and 3 CL games
King Luis
17 years ago
1 month ago
3,111
Liverpool games he misses:

Friendlies:
16 Jul Brondby (A)
19 Jul Preston (A)
24 Jul AS Roma (A)
28 Jul Olympiacos (A)
31 Jul Man City (A)
03 Aug AC Milan (A)
10 Aug Borussia Dortmund (H)

Season:
16 Aug Southampton (H)
23 Aug Man City (A)
30 Aug Tottenham (A)
13 Sep Aston Villa (H)
20 Sep West Ham (A)
27 Sep Everton (H)
04 Oct West Brom (H)
18 Oct QPR (A)
25 Oct Hull City (H)

Plus 1 or 2 league cup games and 3 CL games


The league cup/CL games will probably postpone a couple of those EPL games as well
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Back for the Newcastle game

tbf, he'll probably be sold.
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
Liverpool arent being punished. The player is, he just happens to play for Liverpool. Its his 3rd bloody offence, in 3 different competitions. A blanket ban is the absolute right thing to do, although it should be either longer or take effect once the season starts seeing as about a month and a half of his ban he won't be playing anyway.


He can't train either though (with Liverpool at least), so he will be missing all of pre-season. Obviously Liverpool will give him some kind of regime but he can only do it alone (no training matches or anything). Probably take an extra month to get his match sharpness back
Poe
17 years ago
2 weeks ago
3,675
Rumours on Twitter saying he's banned from football off the pitch too so won't be able to transfer clubs in the summer window?
Slashman X
17 years ago
4 months ago
6,000
Premium
Rumours on Twitter saying he's banned from football off the pitch too so won't be able to transfer clubs in the summer window?


FIFA said he can transfer

You'll need to Login to comment