Should Suarez be banned from football?

[HisHolyHighness]

Another one bites the dust

[Razzler]

Apparently, a Uruguay representative claims the federation is considering not playing vs Colombia because of the Suárez ban.

Are they just refusing to look at the footage?

Waaaa Waaaa Waaaaa ... heaven forbid anyone just get on with things.

They don't play then they can expect to not be at the next World Cup, I would guess

[PaulHartman71]

PoolFan to have a craig style meltdown when Sanchez doesn't go to Liverpool

[ReggaeBwoy]

Behave yourself, 4 months is about right. It'll be appealed and hopefully reduced to 2. Then we can sell him and get someone in who won't miss the first 8 games of the season every year.

No way shall it be reduced. For the next month and a half or so Liverpool or Uruguay will not even be playing in which case he is very lucky. He is lucky the 4 month ban does not start from August,

[Paul Bacon]

Does he get paid during the ban? Shouldnt do

[JD nawrat]

Well done FIFA

I thought a small international ban. Instead it's only a relatively small football ban, should've started from August (or included up until August + 4 months on top of it, so 5 months in total starting July 1st). But well done. I thought they'd cop out and **** themselves.

And it also means Suarez isn't available for the second game of the season against us

[Razzler]

I guess Liverpool can fine him if they wanted to but didn't happen when playing for them and maximum fine is 2 weeks IIRC so reckon he'll come out of this ok in a financial sense

[mlp071]

Does he get paid during the ban? Shouldnt do

You don't get paid while on ban in general...

Still FIFA went way to easy on someone who did this 3 times...if it was someone with lesser football status, they would have get at least 12+ months...shameful..

[Gizzy]

Yeah the ban really shouldn't start until he was due to go back to Liverpool training after the world cup, which would've been around a month after his last WC game.

[Bliss Seeker]

Apparently, a Uruguay representative claims the federation is considering not playing vs Colombia because of the Suárez ban.

Are they just refusing to look at the footage?

Apparently they're all, including the manager, going to walk around wearing t-shirts in support of Suarez.

Surely no one can be that ridiculous. Oh...

[PoolFan]

PoolFan to have a craig style meltdown when Sanchez doesn't go to Liverpool

LOL hardly, but I am glad you are thinking of me

I honestly wouldn't be that bothered if Suarez left, he's a boss player and so entertaining. As long as Liverpool get some decent cash for him and reinvest it properly it's all good. Players come and go, what's important to me is that Liverpool are stable and improving. Rodgers has done a fantastic job so far and if he carries on that way he has done then I am not worried in the least.

[georginho_juventusygr]

Apparently, a Uruguay representative claims the federation is considering not playing vs Colombia because of the Suárez ban.

Are they just refusing to look at the footage?

That would be great

Uruguay should just leave the world cup after the shambles of their denials.

Waaaa Waaaa Waaaaa ... heaven forbid anyone just get on with things.

They don't play then they can expect to not be at the next World Cup, I would guess

So, the second-round spot should be given to Italy? Bah, they already arrived back at home.

[Barry Cartman]

Any goals that Suarez scored at the World Cup should be wiped from the records and the results updated accordingly

[pearcey_90]

Apparently they're all, including the manager, going to walk around wearing t-shirts in support of Suarez.

Surely no one can be that ridiculous. Oh...

Kenny Dalglish must be in charge of their PR department.

[Divinity]

The reactions in here. People saying the ban shouldn't start until August basically just outing themselves as more interested in screwing over Liverpool than anything else.

Fail to see what a four month ban achieves.

[cms186]

The reactions in here. People saying the ban shouldn't start until August basically just outing themselves as more interested in screwing over Liverpool than anything else.

Fail to see what a four month ban achieves.

it punishes the player and hopefully encourages Liverpool to make him get help, rather than just slap him on the wrists ( again )

[Gazza D]

The ban should not stop a transfer as that is restriction of trade.

I wonder if the FA will unsuspend his ban as the worldwide ban now brings his punishment to games under their jurisdiction.

The FA have no ban to unsuspend, he has served his 10 match ban for biting Ivanovic.

[Divinity]

We tried to get him help before. Why are you interested in punishing the club when they had nothing to do with this?

[PoolFan]

The reactions in here. People saying the ban shouldn't start until August basically just outing themselves as more interested in screwing over Liverpool than anything else.

I think it's hilarious, seems that people are worried about a possible resurgent Liverpool. I think we will get better again this season with or without Suarez.

[Katarian]

Fail to see what a four month ban achieves.

A lot less then a longer ban would achieve .

Though let's face it Suarez is a lucky bugger who is an extremely highly sought after and "working" in one of the few jobs where it virtually impossible for him to be sacked no matter his behaviour so it's unlikely he will ever learn a lesson.

[ReggaeBwoy]

The reactions in here. People saying the ban shouldn't start until August basically just outing themselves as more interested in screwing over Liverpool than anything else.

Fail to see what a four month ban achieves.

It has nothing to do with punishing Liverpool. It is about punishing Suarez. He needs a lesson to show that he can't do this rubbish again. He is lucky he is not banned for the rest of 2014.

[cms186]

We tried to get him help before. Why are you interested in punishing the club when they had nothing to do with this?

Because the club enables his behaviour, like that idiotic "show of solidarity" when your players wore T-shirts protesting innocence, perhaps you need to try harder, force him to see a psychiatrist or something

[Santa Claus]

Liverpool have been a mickey mouse club for a while now, so nothing would surpise me.

[aiston]

How does that song go again?

[Coulthard's Jaw]

We tried to get him help before. Why are you interested in punishing the club when they had nothing to do with this?

Well tough, if you're an employee and you commit a crime and you go to jail, your employers get "punished", nobody seriously suggests that the employee shouldn't be punished though.

[Divinity]

A lot less then a longer ban would achieve .

Seriously - does a ban achieve rehabilitation? Recidivism isn't affected by that. Imprisonment doesn't affect recidivism, so a ban won't. We're dealing with a significant psychological problem. A ban doesn't solve that.

[Divinity]

Because the club enables his behaviour, like that idiotic "show of solidarity" when your players wore T-shirts protesting innocence, perhaps you need to try harder, force him to see a psychiatrist or something

Did you just accuse the club of enabling him doing something he did in a Uruguay game, in Brazil?

Newsflash: We made him see a psychiatrist. Next solution?

[ri916]

Surprised Divinity has got himself so worked up in here, he seems quite relaxed about it in the Liverpool thread.

We'll appeal it all the way to CAS and it'll get reduced.

[Divinity]

Well tough' date=' if you're an employee and you commit a crime and you go to jail, your employers get "punished", nobody seriously suggests that the employee shouldn't be punished though.[/quote']

So I'm curious, if you're an employee and you commit a crime, when is your punishment set to begin in any other walk of life when it would most interrupt your employer, despite them having nothing to do with it?

[Coulthard's Jaw]

Seriously - does a ban achieve rehabilitation? Recidivism isn't affected by that. Imprisonment doesn't affect recidivism, so a ban won't. We're dealing with a significant psychological problem. A ban doesn't solve that.

Punishment and rehabilitation aren't mutually exclusive. Hilarious to see a right winger like you suddenly adopting a very left wing position about this though.

[Divinity]

Surprised Divinity has got himself so worked up in here, he seems quite relaxed about in the Liverpool thread.

You're confusing worked up with trying to understand people's reasoning. I actually laughed about it when I found out. It doesn't affect me and unlike most here I'm not bothered about it enough to get outraged. I'm more interested in people's thought process in here.

[Noob21]

put him in some sort of padded cell until the ban is finished?

With a real life cannibal?

[Coulthard's Jaw]

So I'm curious, if you're an employee and you commit a crime, when is your punishment set to begin in any other walk of life when it would most interrupt your employer, despite them having nothing to do with it?

The punishment begins immediately, if FIFA had set out to punish Liverpool they would have the ban start on the first day of the league season.

[Divinity]

Punishment and rehabilitation aren't mutually exclusive. Hilarious to see a right winger like you suddenly adopting a very left wing position about this though.

A right winger. You really don't have a clue about me at all.

[Divinity]

The punishment begins immediately' date=' if FIFA had set out to punish Liverpool they would have the ban start on the first day of the league season.[/quote']

You also need to reread what I'm responding to.

[pearcey_90]

We tried to get him help before. Why are you interested in punishing the club when they had nothing to do with this?

Because hopefully by punishing the club, Suarez will learn that his actions have wider consequences, so therefor hopefully encourage him to change his behaviour.

[MavReck]

The punishment begins immediately' date=' if FIFA had set out to punish Liverpool they would have the ban start on the first day of the league season.[/quote']

That is the point Divinity was arguing to people saying the ban should start in August.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

You also need to reread what I'm responding to.

You're responding to me, pretty hilarious to see you scrabbling around here like a fat man who's **** himself on the train. Kudos to you for not hiding away I guess, taking your sonning like a man.

[Wigmore]

4 months feels about right, perhaps there's an argument for 6 given than July & August are largely out of season. Glad FIFA haven't pulled out of this one as much as I expected them to.

[Wigmore]

Liverpool fans complaining that it's unfair on them are wildly incorrect by the way.

You bought him knowing he's at risk of doing this sort of stuff. It's a bit like buying a house near a cliff-edge. If you don't want the risk, spend your money on a slightly less quality house in the middle of the countryside.

[Barry Cartman]

Fifa aren't punishing Liverpool, they're punishing Suarez, any grievances this causes Liverpool at the same time is completely the fault of Suarez. Liverpool as a club can't act all innocent in this though either, they know what he's like and they've had plenty of chances to sell him and rid themselves of the damages he causes.

[Icelander83]

Seriously - does a ban achieve rehabilitation? Recidivism isn't affected by that. Imprisonment doesn't affect recidivism, so a ban won't. We're dealing with a significant psychological problem. A ban doesn't solve that.

A ban won't help Suarez. That much has been shown. But at least there are now some 12 games where those playing against Liverpool can be certain they won't get bitten during a game. I think the ban is more to protect others than to fix Suarez tbf

4 months feels about right, perhaps there's an argument for 6 given than July & August are largely out of season. Glad FIFA haven't pulled out of this one as much as I expected them to.

Maybe that's FIFA's thinking. 2 months of actual ban, made into four because it starts right away.

[jmr]

Liverpool fans complaining that it's unfair on them are wildly incorrect by the way.

You bought him knowing he's at risk of doing this sort of stuff. It's a bit like buying a house near a cliff-edge. If you don't want the risk, spend your money on a slightly less quality house in the middle of the countryside.

Agreed, saying Liverpool FC don't deserve this is a load of bollocks, they are the ones that defended him with the racism etc, if they wouldn't have defended him so much then I'd think it is harsh on Liverpool, but they didn't, so now they deserve everything they are getting.

[Rio_V]

Not long enough.

[cms186]

Did you just accuse the club of enabling him doing something he did in a Uruguay game, in Brazil?

Newsflash: We made him see a psychiatrist. Next solution?

Something hes done before, in a Liverpool game, in England.

A Sports Psychiatrist, employed by the club, he needs to see a proper, independant one.

[Coulthard's Jaw]

Liverpool fans complaining that it's unfair on them are wildly incorrect by the way.

You bought him knowing he's at risk of doing this sort of stuff. It's a bit like buying a house near a cliff-edge. If you don't want the risk, spend your money on a slightly less quality house in the middle of the countryside.

Could have sold him to us and be laughing at us right now.

[milnerpoint]

Something hes done before, in a Liverpool game, in England.

A Sports Psychiatrist, employed by the club, he needs to see a proper, independant one.

Do you know the name of the person they used last time?

[jmr]

Tobias Funke.

[ReggaeBwoy]

Can't believe Uruguay are appealing the ban? I hope one of their players gets bitten around the sensitive areas and are maimed then we see if they think that warrants a ban.

[Carmi88]

yeah, they are a deluded bunch