Liverpool FC

[Peter Costa]

"so Peter Costa can't lament inconsistency in the FA when the whole business of football is massively inconsistent. The priority for the FA here is to show kids learning the game that biting your opponent is not acceptable, so a 10 game ban is more than fair to that end".

Football is massively inconsonsistant because of the FA - and that should not be the case - certainly not an excuse for ther FA or anyone else to use. Should football or anything else not be about putting right what is wrong,? Should the FA not be looking to change it instead of ensuring it's growth?  As for the FA - I thought their job was to run our game with fainess and inergrity above all esle? What did they show the kids when they found Suarez guilty of racisn despite no clear evidence and just based on balance of probability and how they treated Terry when it was clear what was said? I know what it taught it me about the FA and our game. So the last thing I need from them is to teach my kids.   

First bite 7 games.

Second bite 10 games.

Looks like admirable consistency to me.

I didn't know the FA worked alongside with the Dutch league or used the Dutch league as a guideline - I thought they were a law unto themselves. LOL, they even told FIFA how to act in regards to racism and how they were going to show FIFA how strong they would be in reagrds to that. BTW, that was prior to the case against Suarez. He come along at an opportune time did he not?  But irrespective there was never any question of the FA's desire to apply consistency with Suarez - it's their overall inconsistancy I brought to light. Or do you actually beleive that FA are doing their job with fairness and intergrity and without agendas and hypocrasy?  If so, would love to know how you could come such a conclusion. Cheers!

[Acidmouse]

It's all a smokescreen, Liverpool now playing the victim card in all this...you simply could not make this up. You give the FA a reason to be inconsistent by being stupid then you have to accept it, its not like the FA have a great reputation in dealing with this so why surprised,


Olivier Giroud has more to whine about that anyone this week, slipped while making a tackle and got a three game ban, now that's a bad break

[kinboshi]

It's all a smokescreen, Liverpool now playing the victim card in all this...you simply could not make this up. You give the FA a reason to be inconsistent by being stupid then you have to accept it, its not like the FA have a great reputation in dealing with this so why surprised,


Olivier Giroud has more to whine about that anyone this week, slipped while making a tackle and got a three game ban, now that's a bad break

More of a red card than Jonjo Shelvey's against Man U....

[Acidmouse]

It's all a smokescreen, Liverpool now playing the victim card in all this...you simply could not make this up. You give the FA a reason to be inconsistent by being stupid then you have to accept it, its not like the FA have a great reputation in dealing with this so why surprised,


Olivier Giroud has more to whine about that anyone this week, slipped while making a tackle and got a three game ban, now that's a bad break

More of a red card than Jonjo Shelvey's against Man U....

[Peter Costa]

It's all a smokescreen, Liverpool now playing the victim card in all this...you simply could not make this up. You give the FA a reason to be inconsistent by being stupid then you have to accept it, its not like the FA have a great reputation in dealing with this so why surprised,


Olivier Giroud has more to whine about that anyone this week, slipped while making a tackle and got a three game ban, now that's a bad break

This is not about LFC playing the victim - it's about the game BEING the victim. As you rightly pointed out, Giroud being one of MANY victims this year alone with unfair treatment. As for giving the FA a reason to be inconsistent, surely, a governing body is not there to take advantage of situations that further their own agendas, thery are there to be fair in cases.  As you make clear, that is not the case!  

[The Camel]

"so Peter Costa can't lament inconsistency in the FA when the whole business of football is massively inconsistent. The priority for the FA here is to show kids learning the game that biting your opponent is not acceptable, so a 10 game ban is more than fair to that end".

Football is massively inconsonsistant because of the FA - and that should not be the case - certainly not an excuse for ther FA or anyone else to use. Should football or anything else not be about putting right what is wrong,? Should the FA not be looking to change it instead of ensuring it's growth?  As for the FA - I thought their job was to run our game with fainess and inergrity above all esle? What did they show the kids when they found Suarez guilty of racisn despite no clear evidence and just based on balance of probability and how they treated Terry when it was clear what was said? I know what it taught it me about the FA and our game. So the last thing I need from them is to teach my kids.   

First bite 7 games.

Second bite 10 games.

Looks like admirable consistency to me.

I didn't know the FA worked alongside with the Dutch league or used the Dutch league as a guideline - I thought they were a law unto themselves. LOL, they even told FIFA how to act in regards to racism and how they were going to show FIFA how strong they would be in reagrds to that. BTW, that was prior to the case against Suarez. He come along at an opportune time did he not?  But irrespective there was never any question of the FA's desire to apply consistency with Suarez - it's their overall inconsistancy I brought to light. Or do you actually beleive that FA are doing their job with fairness and intergrity and without agendas and hypocrasy?  If so, would love to know how you could come such a conclusion. Cheers!

He got a 7 game ban.

You would think that would teach him not to do it again.

Nope that didn't work, did it?

10 games is light.

My boy will be taking up under 8 football next season, I don't want kids behaving like that, so adults should show the way.

[TL900]

Liverpool fans

[MANTIS01]

Peter, it's the vast amounts of money which breeds inconsistency and makes the game a victim, not the FA. This could be reduced if all the players, clubs and leagues worked together for the good of the game, but that is very unlikely. If Suarez was a poor player Liverpool would be outraged over the racism and biting incidents, but because he is a good player they are supportive. How much a player is worth to the club is directly related to what the reaction is, and that's about as inconsistent as it gets.

[Peter Costa]

Peter, it's the vast amounts of money which breeds inconsistency and makes the game a victim, not the FA. This could be reduced if all the players, clubs and leagues worked together for the good of the game, but that is very unlikely. If Suarez was a poor player Liverpool would be outraged over the racism and biting incidents, but because he is a good player they are supportive. How much a player is worth to the club is directly related to what the reaction is, and that's about as inconsistent as it gets.

Surely, one area where we can see coniststency is the one that the FA have control over - namely, being fair in regards to incidents. the fact that theri current criteria levaes it open to abuse and unfairness - is dow to the FA, not clubs and players.

In regards to your other point about LFC being surpportive - I see that comment on many forums but the statement is 100% wrong. LFC are not being surportive towards Suarez in regards to the incident - they find becuase of it. LFC simply feel that the 10 game ban is excessive. Is that being supportive or having a say in how the game is run? Considering the FA's track record, are suggesting we simply accept what the FA dishes out every and never question anything? 

In regards to the Evra incident, are you suggesting that there was no room for error on the judgment? Do you see a judgement, not based on clear evidence, but on balance as a verdict that one should accept without questioning the reason and logic behind such a judgment? If you were accused of something serious, would you happily go to a court and face serious charges and accept being found guilty on balance and not actual evidence of fact. In effect, LFC had every right to question that judgment and shoudl have fought it further, considering that so much was based on oponion on the language used and its potential meaning. Simply put, that judgment was in no way proven - just the chosen judgment.   

[Tal]

Camel has spanked this one out of the park, IMHO.

If you punish someone severely - too severely in the views of some - and they then reoffend, why would the immediate reaction be that the criminal justice system is being too harsh when he gets a bigger punishment than he got last time?

I could prattle on all day and bore the pants off all those here present about the purpose of sentencing, but I don't consider this punishment to be:

a) prohibitively unfair;
b) a sign of an incompetent or corrupt authority; or
c) anti-Liverpool

There is an element of punishment and deterrent in this ban, but the fact remains we all know that, if Suarez stays at Anfield, he'll do something childish and stupid before Christmas. It will make the papers - who love a Villain, even if it is one they have created by their own provocation - and you, me and everyone else will be back here having a beerless pub natter.

Messi whinges, Ronaldo winks, Bale dives, Maradona handles, Zidane and Cantona employ moves from Tekken, but Suarez does all of those and yet there are plenty of perfectly intelligent people out there who still think that isn't enough to outweigh what he can do with a football.

[aaron1867]

I had to laugh when I read what Brendan Rodgers had to say, when he said "He has a small wire that is wrong"

It's not that small though is that wire is it?

The guy has made some awful tackles on players, stood on people when they have been on the floor, been caught as a racist and bit two different players and Brendan says it's a small wire, LOL.

Then people saying that they are just bullying just one person in Suarez, but we can't let him get away with what he has doing in our English game. The guy is to put it blunty, a cowardly scumbag.

If he had been racist to people where there are no cameras or stood on people when they are down or in fact bit an individual where there are no cameras, they guy would already have had his head kicked in several times, the coward needs to get into the real world.

His apology means naff all either, he does not mean a fkin word.

10 game ban is OK, love to know what the fine is.

[kinboshi]

I had to laugh when I read what Brendan Rodgers had to say, when he said "He has a small wire that is wrong"

It's not that small though is that wire is it?

The guy has made some awful tackles on players, stood on people when they have been on the floor, been caught as a racist and bit two different players and Brendan says it's a small wire, LOL.

Then people saying that they are just bullying just one person in Suarez, but we can't let him get away with what he has doing in our English game. The guy is to put it blunty, a cowardly scumbag.

If he had been racist to people where there are no cameras or stood on people when they are down or in fact bit an individual where there are no cameras, they guy would already have had his head kicked in several times, the coward needs to get into the real world.

His apology means naff all either, he does not mean a fkin word.

10 game ban is OK, love to know what the fine is.

Thanks for the insightful input.

[sweet potata!]

Has anyone mentioned that all of Suarez' heinous acts have happened on the football field, by all accounts he is a quiet family man off the field, so all this garbage of calling him a scumbag or vile etc is the stuff of faux outraged drama queens IMO, try to gain a bit of perspective ffs.

[aaron1867]

Has anyone mentioned that all of Suarez' heinous acts have happened on the football field, by all accounts he is a quiet family man off the field, so all this garbage of calling him a scumbag or vile etc is the stuff of faux outraged drama queens IMO, try to gain a bit of perspective ffs.

Ah, he did it on a football field, then it's fine isn't. Of course it's fin to be racist and bite people.

As you were.

[77dave]

Has anyone mentioned that all of Suarez' heinous acts have happened on the football field, by all accounts he is a quiet family man off the field, so all this garbage of calling him a scumbag or vile etc is the stuff of faux outraged drama queens IMO, try to gain a bit of perspective ffs.

Ah, he did it on a football field, then it's fine isn't. Of course it's fin to be racist and bite people.

As you were.

who do you support Aaron?