Suarez recieves TEN match ban

Violent conduct . . done it before, should have been a year ban

Suarez banned for ten games

THE F.A.

Wednesday, 24 April 2013
.
http://www.thefa.com

Luis Suarez has been suspended for a total of ten matches after an Independent Regulatory Commission today ruled on a charge of violent conduct.

A three-person Independent Regulatory Commission today upheld The FA’s claim that a suspension of three matches was clearly insufficient and the player will serve a further seven first-team matches in addition to the standard three. The suspension begins with immediate effect.

This follows an incident with Chelsea’s Branislav Ivanovic in Sunday’s fixture at Anfield.

The Liverpool forward had accepted a charge of violent conduct but had denied The FA’s claim that the standard three-match sanction was insufficient for the offence.

The incident was not seen by the match officials and has therefore been retrospectively reviewed – click here for a video explanation of ‘not seen incidents’.

Suarez has until midday on Friday 26 April to appeal the additional suspension, above the standard three matches
Read more at http://www.thefa.com/News/governance/2013/apr/luis-suarez-violent-conduct-ch...

Liverpool managing director Ian Ayre said the club was “shocked and disappointed” by the “severity” of the FA’s decision

How on earth can liverpool be shocked at severity?, the guy has bitten into someones fcking arm. Loads of previous, deserves 10 games

IS THAT ALL FFS

If Liverpool had taken action themselves and suspended him until end of season I thought ten might be adequate, But they chose not to. Should be twenty. Every kid in thhe park will be chomping their mates when they get tackled having watched that chump.

Liverpool managing director Ian Ayre said the club was “shocked and disappointed” by the “severity” of the FA’s decision

Previously banned for 7 games for the same offence. How the f*ck can he be shocked by it?

DeSSieReborn
24 Apr 13 15:18
Joined:
21 Jun 02
| Topic/replies: 16,064 | Blogger: DeSSieReborn's blog
If Liverpool had taken action themselves and suspended him until end of season I thought ten might be adequate, But they chose not to. Should be twenty. Every kid in thhe park will be chomping their mates when they get tackled having watched that chump.


Just like all the kids started fly kicking rival fans on the sidelines after Cantona and pushing referees after Di Canio.

Fortunately for Liverpool their season was already over.

Be interesting to see if he can actually learn this time, I have my doubts.

Hope the club prove themselves to be as pathetic as Ayre's comments and appeal the severity.

Then the FA can increase it to the 15+ games it should have been

DeSSieReborn 24 Apr 13 15:18 
If Liverpool had taken action themselves and suspended him until end of season I thought ten might be adequate, But they chose not to. Should be twenty. Every kid in thhe park will be chomping their mates when they get tackled having watched that chump.





Do people actually believe this?

long time ago but..

Roy Keane banned 8 games in total for intending to break someones leg, i'd be fairly confident that Keane had been sent off for violent conduct before that

The ban is on a par with what the Dutch FA gave him, 7 games.

It's still less than similar offences occuring in both Rugby codes.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rRM4i9YDias

how many games ban should this tackle get?

Should have been banned for a year

Apr 24, 2013 -- 3:28PM, Regular Fries wrote:

The ban is on a par with what the Dutch FA gave him, 7 games.It's still less than similar offences occuring in both Rugby codes.

7 games ban was stupid in the first place

Liverpool Football Club is a verminous institution. Why don't the FA just throw them out of the League?

I suppose the ban is designed to prevent that kind of thing happening again.

With this in mind Suarez is lucky it's only 10 games imo.

Meanwhile he stayed on the pitch,and then scored the equaliser.How about banning the ref?!

this ones better arrong

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_embedded&v=rRM4i9YDias

that's the one i posted bhoys

Thats assault by aguero

sorry pal. this one

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_st29mlQwU

They were thinking of giving him 20 games but i hear they took his 'good conduct' in to consideration seen as he's never been sent off for Liverpool

If you are going to ban ref's for not spotting off the ball incidents you wouldn't have enough to fulfil a Saturday fixture list - it should though increase the calls for TV reviews as per cricket, tennis, rugby league, rugby union etc etc - the financial implication to Chelsea (i know thats hardly a moral subject with their owner) could be £30/£50 million if they miss out on Champions League football.

Does the ban include European football

Apr 24, 2013 -- 3:40PM, The Bhoys wrote:

sorry pal. this one http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=p_st29mlQwU

yes, banned for less games than Suarez too

He should count himself fortunate to only get a 10 game ban.  He must be a thoroughly unpleasant person to be around at any time.

Totally and utterly ridiculous, you break someones leg and get 3 matches or even nothing

There is always an element of doubt when someones leg is broken and no footballer is going to clearly admit that it was intentional. You can't bite someone and claim it was accidental.

Given the previous ban I think this one is a little lenient but not outrageously so.

There is always an element of doubt when someones leg is broken and no footballer is going to clearly admit that it was intentional. You can't bite someone and claim it was accidental.

Absolutely. Typical of the scousers to once again try to make out he's somehow been hard done by.

Apr 24, 2013 -- 3:45PM, Eeternaloptimist wrote:

There is always an element of doubt when someones leg is broken and no footballer is going to clearly admit that it was intentional. You can't bite someone and claim it was accidental.

Roy Keane

http://www.youtube.com/watch?feature=player_detailpage&v=y7sqDrZU96w#t=25s

Thatcher knocks Pedro Mendes out, causes a seizure, 8 game ban

so a bite is just little bit less than hospitalising someone.

I know he has previous.

Aaronh

Keane was a thug who shaat himself when he came up against genuine hard men but even he left an element of doubt in his autobiography relating to that tackle when he said something along the lines of, I think the ball was there.

Same to you Ibrahima. Find me a pro who holds his hands up and admits at the time that he intentionally broke a fellow pros leg and I'll show you a man who should be sitting out a sizeable period of time away from the game. Suarez deliberately bit someone and didn't learn his lesson because here we are again.

joey barton was banned for 12 games for 2 offences.
also re the thatcher ban he got that even though he got a yellow.

the defoe case then doesnt make sense if a bite is that serious.

fa need to be disbanded and quickly.

a nibble according to them is worse than racism.

Eeternaloptimist • April 24, 2013 3:57 PM BST
Aaronh

Keane was a thug who shaat himself when he came up against genuine hard men

Yep - he looked terrified by Vierra in the tunnel and Shearer at St James's. Still, don't let facts get in the way...

Ask Keane about Andy Myers. Came unstuck there

Apr 24, 2013 -- 3:57PM, Eeternaloptimist wrote:

AaronhKeane was a thug who shaat himself when he came up against genuine hard men but even he left an element of doubt in his autobiography relating to that tackle when he said something along the lines of, I think the ball was there.

I'd waited long enough. I f****** hit him hard. The ball was there (I think). Take that you c***. And don't ever stand over me sneering about fake injuries. Talking

Even in the dressing room afterwards, I had no remorse. My attitude was, f*** him. What goes around comes around. He got his just rewards. He f***** me over and my attitude is an eye for an eye.

He admitted that he would have done it again in the same situation..

Vierra and Shearer as hard men.

No point in digging out the quote if it backs up my two points.

I think the ban is quite severe. Not only does he miss the rest of this season, when he comes back, Liverpool's next season will be over too.

Who did you have in mind?
The Juventus midfield?

Apr 24, 2013 -- 4:04PM, Eeternaloptimist wrote:

No point in digging out the quote if it backs up my two points.

saying that he would do it again and showed no remorse definitely suggests a lack of intent

Load of sh1te as usual Eet

Longest bans:

9 months - Manchester United's Eric Cantona for 'kung-fu' kicking a supporter in 1995
9 months - Chelsea keeper Mark Bosnich who tested positive for cocaine in 2003
8 months - Rio Ferdinand of Manchester United for missing a drugs test in 2003
12 games - QPR's Joey Barton for two counts of violent conduct against Manchester City players in 2012
11 games - Sheffield Wednesday's Paolo Di Canio for pushing referee Paul Alcock in 1998
10 games - Southampton's David Prutton for shoving referee Alan Wiley in 2005
10 games - Luis Suarez for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic in 2013
9 games - Paul Davis of Arsenal for punching Southampton's Glenn Cockerill in 1988
8 games - Luis Suarez for racially abusing Patrice Evra in 2011
8 games - Man City's Ben Thatcher for elbowing Portsmouth's Pedro Mendes in 2006
5 weeks - Man Utd's Roy Keane for comments made in his autobiography in 2002

aaronh

There is a difference between admitting that you have deliberately broken someones leg and saying that you hit someone hard with the ball being there and then not giving a feck about what happened to them and you would hit them just as hard next time. At worst you could argue that this is reckless but there is no admission of deliberate intent which was the point in question.

Who gives a chit, Keane is a faux hard man that liked to initiate fights on the field knowing full well it could never come to blows.

besides "The ball was there (I think)", yeah he definitely cared about the ball

is it 3 strikes and its a life ban will someone lay me odds that he will do it again

aaron

Of course he didn't care about the ball. Of course he did the man. The point is that he didn't admit it and he put the bit about the ball in there to allow for an element of doubt on one hand whilst playing up to his fake hard man image. He's a rancid cnunt but the point is he didn't unambiguously admit it.

I don't think he should have been banned.................but SECTIONED!!!!

Why compare this with different incidents that bare no relevance?

Comparing this to Defoe holds more weight, but the FA got it wrong with Defoe, what are they supposed to do, keep getting cases wrong just so they tally up?

Comparing this to Defoe holds more weight, but the FA got it wrong with Defoe, what are they supposed to do, keep getting cases wrong just so they tally up?

The dicks have gone from one extreme to the other.

l,pool fc is a basket case,there paying someone 100 and odd grand a week who,s been banned for 18 games in 2 instances,and when playing has got them to within 30 odd points of man utd,

So no "invisible sniper" for the first few months of the new season.  Very disappointing.

Apr 24, 2013 -- 5:02PM, kincsem wrote:

So no "invisible sniper" for the first few months of the new season.  Very disappointing.

it's okay, he will have to stick around at White Hart Lane instead

Apr 24, 2013 -- 4:59PM, 1st time poster wrote:

l,pool fc is a basket case,there paying someone 100 and odd grand a week who,s been banned for 18 games in 2 instances,and when playing has got them to within 30 odd points of man utd,

yup, one of the best players in the league and top scorer is the reason Liverpool are so far behind and not that the rest of the team is a load of ****

As regular fries pointed out earlier Rugby (both codes i think) minimum 12 games and maximum of 4 years for biting depending on the severity. Suarezshould thank his luck stars the FA havent adopted that sort of punishment, id take the 10 and consider myself very luck.

Defoe bite (which was even worse than Suarez) = yellow card
Suarez bite = 10 match ban

LOL 

And Defoe didn't wasn't forced into a firestorm of controversy where he was pushed into an apology.  In fact quite the opposite, played it off like it was nothing and apparently the ref and FA thought the same.  What a farce.

Defoe felt his actions had been "blown out of all proportion".
"The referee was standing over me and if he felt I had done something bad he would have sent me off," said the 24-year-old.
"It doesn't look great on TV and I accept that I have a responsibility to conduct myself in the right way.
"When the West Ham player fouled me, I reacted in a bit of a mischievous way - my character is a little like that at times."

by the FA rules, if the referee had seen 'part of the incident' but decided not to give Suarez a yellow , he would not have been banned or punished in any way at all

i reckon this is the fa pandering to the red tops, and the holier than thou brigade.

in the last few weeks they've allowed tackles that hospitalised apponents, and assaults that would have ended up in court if commited in a boozer go unpunished.

they now give 7 matches for something that has had very little effect on the player he bit.

their prime concern should be player safety.

but thet seem more interested in keeping the tabloids off their back.

From what I understand the FA can intervene in exceptional cases. 

If what you say is correct though then the ruling procedures are farcical.  So if the ref admits to seeing the incident and didn't feel it merited a second yellow Suarez gets nothing?  So in the end its better for justice if the ref misses the big calls.  lol

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2313071/Luis-Suarez-bites-Branislav-Ivanovic-Mum-blames-Liverpool-striker-copycat-incident.html

wonder if the kid will get a 10 day ban from school

Someone needs to ban Suarez from swimming in the sea too.

Whilst he's banned, he'll have plenty of time to soak up some sun on the beach (and hopefully reflect on his actions):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Z6r68we-A8k

I may advocate a longer ban for Suarez, but I do feel the FA are ****ed up. Luiz taking that young kid out in the cup with that premeditated shoulder charge on his chin, agueros obvious attempt to hurt with that double footed lunge....was a bite any more dangerous than these incidents?

I dont think they should let Suarez off any lighter, but they have to get their act in order. If something is dangerous and done with intent then they should act, whatever the referee has done. Luiz and Suarez, and indeed Carragher with that tackle on Nani, got off very lightly. Many more incidents too

Apr 24, 2013 -- 6:51PM, DeSSieReborn wrote:

I dont think they should let Suarez off any lighter, but they have to get their act in order. If something is dangerous and done with intent then they should act, whatever the referee has done. Luiz and Suarez, and indeed Carragher with that tackle on Nani, got off very lightly. Many more incidents too

or Rooney elbowing Mccarthy

Callum McManaman.....

Another genuis driven out the  prem

I'm also offended by the grammar used by LFC in their statement this afternoon. That alone should justify the ban.

you're obviously easily offended

load of man utd hypocrits on this thread remember cantona u twats

Maybe he could join Balotelli and become a circus act

Umm... maybe it needs pointing out to you that United banned Cantona for almost half a season off their own bat.
Compare with the classless oiks at the other end of the East Lancs.

dessie u are a knob of yhr highest order --remember roy keane didnt hear you shouting then u hypocrite

And it's 20 now by the way.

He took his punishment (which incidently United didnt wait for the FA to impose) Considering Cantona didnt connect but kicked fresh air he got stung compareds to what players these days get away with.....

The ban is twenty? Or Uniteds title count

include andy pandy in the liverpool obsessed hatred club also

dessie ill lend u my glasses

3 match ban would have been fair

fa have been very lenient with suarez, should have been 6 months.

Cantona should never have been even sent off, never mind a ban. He didn't connect, no harm done

bite him he did not break his leg.....

his misdeameanour came back to bite him in the end