• You may have to login or register before you can post and view our exclusive members only forums.
    To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.

Bite, Nibble, Munch and Chomp

I’M SORRY, BUT IT’S TIME FOR YOU TO JUST FUCK OFF. Yes, you read that correctly, and yes, I know it’ll come as a shock to some that I’ve come out with a statement like this, but I can assure you I’ve not taken this position without a great deal of thought. I’ve considered it carefully, and enough is enough. You can’t keep defending actions like these and hoping that things will change. They won’t. I think we can all agree there’s clear proof of that, and Tuesday night was yet another in a long line of perfect examples. It’ll just keep happening again and again unless we address it correctly, right here, right now. And I’m not naive. I know that many will disagree with me, and that some will of course be uncomfortable with what I’m proposing, but I genuinely think it’s for the best if we put everyone into a giant lead safe, seal it forever, and drop it to the bottom of the fucking ocean. What? Okay, a couple of giant safes. You’re right – one won’t be enough. Ah, you thought I was talking about Luis Suarez, didn’t you? Nah. Do you need me to? I mean, I could, it’s just, well…I really don’t fucking care. Honestly, I really don’t. I think I did last time, and now…nothing. And this apparently makes me a bad person. I’m not sure whether I’ve tried to care and failed or if it’s just because I’m all Suarez’d out from last year, but whatever the reason I’m fairly certain that, ultimately, I just don’t give a shiny, silver shite anymore. He’s a flawed genius, that’s all there is to it, and he isn’t the first and won’t be the last. Personally, I’m far more concerned with the idea that I SHOULD care, like those I’d like to shuttle off this fucking planet pretend to.* There’s this idea that I should be outraged, like Sherrie Hewson was on Loose Women, and I should be expressing this outrage through any form of social media I can get my grubby little mitts on, like Frankie Cocozza. I could draw up my own ‘tolerance guide’ and stick to it when it suits me – perhaps having Kung Fu kicks to the chest at one end and bites to the shoulder at the other – then go spitting mental on Twitter and Facebook, even if I’m older than Joseph Minala’s Rubik’s Cube. Truth is, this biting nonsense, or ‘Bitegate’ if you’re a virgin, isn’t even the worst thing to have happened at this World Cup. I’ve been more appalled at having my eyes raped by the sight of that globular bollock Adrian Chiles’ feet, or by Martin O’Neill modelling your dad’s summerwear collection, with his reflective legs buckled together as if concealing the world’s biggest predatory lob-on. Or by how many times I’ve had my mind fisted to the tune of Andy ‘Yep’ Townsend saying “Yep” a thousand times per “Yep” game, or by Clarke ‘Countdown Cock’ Carlisle telling us how Colombia’s Jackson Martinez has struggled to get into the fucking Ecuador side. I’ve listened to the co-commentary equivalent of an afternoon tour of Dignitas courtesy of Phil Neville, a grown man with highlights. I’ve seen a picture of Sol Campbell inexplicably dressed like Larry Grayson’s audition for Benidorm, and I’ve self-harmed at the notion that somebody would actually employ Gibraltar’s Danny Higginbotham to torture me through my telly. Nevertheless, I would happily sit through it all again. Every single moment, every last ill-informed sodding utterance, every glance at a fat man’s bunions, than have to listen to the cretinous fucking judgement of the great British public, and the bombastic edification suggested by punditry nimrods like this stupid cunt: “I’m sorry, but they’ve got to throw him in jail and lock him up forever.” - Danny Mills, a glistening shitcase of some prestige Is this how I’m supposed to react? Like Danny Mills? Really? He bit someone on the shoulder, you absolute minge pipe, he didn’t bugger a Royal. But this is just one example of the hyperbolic and, in some instances, hilariously hypocritical reactions on show. Elsewhere, we’ve got Stan ‘I only hit her once’ Collymore wading in to suggest counselling, and Piers ‘My good friend the dead girl’s phone hacker’ Morgan calling Suarez an “utter lunatic” shortly before asking his “mate” Mike Tyson, a man who served a conviction for rape in 1992, for his views on the matter. Alan Shearer wants Suarez “hammered”, which is presumably how Neil Lennon felt after Shearer ‘accidentally’ tried to remove his face with a boot some years ago. An incident he was never punished for, by the way. Andy Murray can’t believe it, Bruce Springsteen can’t either, and pundits at the BBC are so outraged they forgot their employer practically gave the world’s biggest paedo a backstage pass to the knickers of every child in the studio for 30 years. But we can all jump on the moral fucking bandwagon when it suits us, can’t we? Just make sure your opinion includes a bite pun. Sadly, perspective seems to be lost at the drop of a hat, but I’ll see if I can offer some now. This is a sport, and it’s governed by a set of rules which are put in place for the betterment of that sport. When a player steps out of the tunnel and out onto the pitch they’re to obey those rules. If a player breaks those rules then they should be punished. So, quite clearly and quite rightly, Luis Suarez should be punished. For violent conduct. Because that’s what it is and nothing more. Just like a kick is. Or a punch is. Or a headbutt is. Or an unexpected and potentially life threatening forearm to the back of the head is (no matter how much you want to pretend like it didn’t happen, Wayne). A bite on the shoulder, though fucking stupid, isn’t worse than any of these. It’s violent conduct, should be treated as such, and that’s that. FIFA, UEFA, our FA, none of them should get to make up the rules as they go along, and certainly not because of public pressure or rival supporter reaction, but that’s what appears to be happening. If it isn’t, then how come we’ve all been asking how long his ban’s likely to be? Shouldn’t we know? Isn’t it in those rules you’ve written? And it really doesn’t matter what your opinion is, or how much you dislike Luis Suarez or even LIKE him for that matter. It’s fuck all to do with you, and it SHOULD be fuck all to do with you. Your outrage is merely a byproduct of an occurrence, and let’s face it – it’s also complete bollocks. The only thing you’re outraged about is the possibility of Luis Suarez dicking your defence like it’s the last minge on Merseyside again next season. All your cry-arsing about deportation, expulsion or, if you’re a dribbling, egg-headed simpleton, jail time, is as transparent as it is pointless. It’s a sportsman, breaking a rule, in a sport. Are you really suggesting that Luis Suarez, his wife and two young children are uprooted from their home and removed from the country…because of a bite? A little one on someone’s shoulder? Because if you are, please, get in the fucking safe. “I don’t even follow football, but if this Suarez has bitten someone he should be deported.” - Adolf Hitler And so to the ruination of this piece in the form of today’s judgement. Four months. Four fucking months. A real landmark ruling by FIFA as nothing so stupid has ever been seen before. Honestly, watch the end of Transformers, that’s where I got the idea from. They drop Megatron into the ocean. Celebrations all round, no doubt, as the villain gets his comeuppance once more. Facebook and Twitter rejoice, memes everywhere, hilarious puns abound. He’s not even allowed to train. Not even allowed to stay in the same hotel. We could disguise the safes as Nandos or The Pound Shop and pretend there’s some kind of special event they simply can’t miss going on inside, like a Jordan book signing. I mean, they’d turn up to the unveiling of a fucking queef if they thought that useless shag epidemic was there, too. And she’s bound to have one ready (a book, not a queef), what with it being six months and a shiny new bastard since the last. I hope I haven’t offended Sherrie Hewson with this. Four months. No precedent. Four months, from thin air. £65,000 fine. Still, the great British public, they’ll be happy. The great British public, who sit up on Henman Hill / Murray’s Minge / Judy’s Quim, or whatever it’s fucking called now, with their painted faces and Union Jack bowler hats, waving little plastic flags. Dressed as knights. Wearing chainmail. They’ll be happy. The nasty man got his punishment. K-Swiss. Outrageous. God save the Queen. We’d probably need some sort of financial backing to pay for the safe(s), so I was thinking Kickstarter. Even if they escaped – loads of water. Big safe, made of lead, dickheads inside, ocean. Trust me, it’s a winner… * Initial idea, abandoned because of spiraling costs.


Fucking hell where are the paragraphs!!! I read all that with out taking breath now I feel dizzy...

Good post btw
 
This one's real.....

"Everyone knows what they've done to Luis. They wanted him out of the World Cup. Perfect, they did it. They chucked him out of there like a dog” - Lila Piriz Da Rosa, Suarez's grandmother
 
This one's real.....

"Everyone knows what they've done to Luis. They wanted him out of the World Cup. Perfect, they did it. They chucked him out of there like a dog” - Lila Piriz Da Rosa, Suarez's grandmother

The things is if he wasn't such a big name.. No doubt it would not of got the coverage it had done..

To quote from one of my favourite films 'With great powers Comes a great responsibility' His lack of understanding his responsibility to the wider market is why he is in this mess
 
Have you even read what I said? I said there is no precedent. If you two are going to continue to respond, at least have the grace to read the fucking post.

I read your sentence about making it up out of thin air. How about instead posting whiny bullshit why don't you tell us what you think should be done and the logical basis for it?
 
I read your sentence about making it up out of thin air. How about instead posting whiny bullshit why don't you tell us what you think should be done and the logical basis for it?

He shouldn't have been banned for Liverpool for starters, why should he?
 
I read your sentence about making it up out of thin air. How about instead posting whiny bullshit why don't you tell us what you think should be done and the logical basis for it?

As opposed to the utter cock that you post, that's a bit fucking rich. I'm posting whiny bullshit? Better than the self righteous shite that comes from you and Mick.
 
So you have no proposal, you just want to moan about inconsistencies?

Well at least we're clear on that
 
And about there being no precedent, are you saying you're not aware of other bans handed out for biting players?
 
And about there being no precedent, are you saying you're not aware of other bans handed out for biting players?

I'm saying there's no precedent for someone doing it three times, as you well know.

Fairness - a lengthy International ban, say a year plus a larger fine than what was given, when you consider the amount he's earned from sponsorships during the World Cup. I wouldn't have even been bothered if they had extended the ruling to the CL league, as he would potentially face the Italian lad in the competition. I think that's fair and about as extreme as it should have got.
 
Doc Mac made a good point before. It's violent conduct. It's fucking weird and all that, but essentially it's violent conduct, and nowhere near as damaging as a punch or kick or elbow or anything else that comes under violent conduct, and there are repeat offenders for those acts too. Long international ban is excessive from that point of view, but accounts for the weirdness and shock factor. That's fair enough. Hell, even a few games for Liverpool. But not fucking 13.
 
I think infringements that threaten the integrity of the game, such as drug use and match-fixing should carry the harshest sentences and "worldwide" bans.

Things like cheating on the pitch and violent conduct are more of a grey area because people have differing views as to what is acceptable / tolerable. There are obviously baseline standards you can set for things you see regularly like nasty tackles and brawls but for the more exceptional cases I think you should judge against a number of criteria such as intent and potential / actual harm caused.

In my opinion, the biggest problem for Suarez wasn't the fact that he'd done it before but that this time he did it in a high profile game in the World Cup with the eyes of the world watching. FIFA probably felt like they had to make an example of him. Had he have done it in a meaningless friendly or in a qualifier I'm convinced the punishment would've been far less severe.
 
I said Suarez is wrong, I acknowledged there is no precedent, that doesn't make them extending the punishment to us as "just" or fair, just because no one else has done this before. That's why people are looking for contexts. By Rosco and Ryan's reckoning, he could have been banned for life from every aspect of the game and it would be ok, just because there's no precedent. Like I said, we rehabilitated him last season and got the best football and behaviour from him, for what?

Mark,

I don't understand what answer you're expecting to get here... He's our player. We knew the risks when we signed him. We knew the risks when we resigned him. And now he's gone and fucked us over again, and so of course we're punished. He's ours. And he's put himself and therefore us into this position. It's simply the nature of us employing such a clearly mentally unstable individual. FIFA cannot adequately punish the player without us being hurt.
 
The biggest problem is not that Suarez loses it on the pitch, we see that happen all the time, and its occasionally remarkable, but it goes away. His problem is he's got a very specific, newsworthy way of losing it on the pitch that is famous as well as somewhat taboo. Most culture judges it to be more bestial, more insane. We can't really complain about the arbitrary aspects of mores within the context of a game where you are only allowed to kick a sphere with your feet, can we?

In the end, I think its probably true that Suarez doesn't get the most just treatment, and I do think that the english press likes demonizing him, and I think elements of it are ethnocentric and post colonial, if not racist, but I think by far the biggest reason they like covering him by far is that people love to read about him, and not any of those reasons. There's something fascinating about him, it might be the giant pictures of him biting people on front pages. Yes, I think that's it.

I think yes, Fifa is corrupt, all the commentators are hypocrites, etc. I totally agree that the level of moral outrage is ludicrous given the context and the moral authority of fifa. It's not that those arguments don't have some small bits of truth in them, its not like I don't see criticism of some of the reaction as valid.

But in the end, when it comes to the punishment, you are left arguing that someone who bit people three times with a camera on him at all times should technically perhaps have received a few games less suspension. Just as there are thousands of better causes for moral outrage, even at the world cup this year, there are thousands of better causes to be championing than how Suarez has been punished yesterday.
 
I've tweeted Chiellini to thank him for his kind words.

As I remarked about 20 pages back, it's all about etiquette. Biting is not football etiquette. When I awoke to the sound of John Hartson lambasting Suarez on the radio, he was roaring: "Biting is not done. It's just not done."

Kicking a team mate's head on the training ground, however, conforms to football etiquette. That is done, its pretty OK.
 
Great post Fark.

If he had elbowed Chiellini and broke his nose, he'd have probably got a lesser punishment.

But biting people is just seen as taboo, cowardly and disgusting. The fact he's done it 3 times too, in front of a camera, meant that whatever punishment that was handed down, was always going to be hard to argue against.
 
Mark,

I don't understand what answer you're expecting to get here... He's our player. We knew the risks when we signed him. We knew the risks when we resigned him. And now he's gone and fucked us over again, and so of course we're punished. He's ours. And he's put himself and therefore us into this position. It's simply the nature of us employing such a clearly mentally unstable individual. FIFA cannot adequately punish the player without us being hurt.

Fair enough, but people have a right to gauge whether they feel it's fair or not - if there's no right or wrong answer, the rules are up in the air and FIFA has interpreted them as they have seen fit, which is the real issue, because that means they can be manipulated - as people have said regarding putting it in the "violent conduct" category.

I don't think it's a fair punishment as it punishes the club as much as the player and to a stronger degree than the International side he was representing. I don't see how it's particularly illogical to find that to be a poor conclusion - Uruguay were responsible for him at the time.

We've coaxed the best form and behaviour from him last season, it was out of our hands what he was doing while he was granted International duty.
 
But how can the act be properly punished without LFC being hurt..? If it's an International ban only, that's what? 5 games a season? That's no deterant. It comes with the territory. If there's anger to be apportioned out, surely 95% should be sent Suarez's way, with just a little bit belonging to FIFA?

Question (to all): Did Diouf disgrace our club when he spat on that Celtic fan?
 
I thought so at the time. Given the strong links we have to that club I was embarrassed and appalled. Hated him ever since.

Agreed. Me too. And not becuase it was Celtic. Because he was representing us when he did it.

Now, that was "only" a spit. And "only" once.

This is the third time Suarez has bitten somebody. As disgusting as Diouf's incident was, this is far worse. And it's the third time.

He has now disgraced our club three times. And it will happen again.

Enough's enough. I don't understand why so few people feel this way...
 
Mark,

I don't understand what answer you're expecting to get here... He's our player. We knew the risks when we signed him. We knew the risks when we resigned him. And now he's gone and fucked us over again, and so of course we're punished. He's ours. And he's put himself and therefore us into this position. It's simply the nature of us employing such a clearly mentally unstable individual. FIFA cannot adequately punish the player without us being hurt.


The point is we acted on those risks, through whatever counselling and man-management kept him sane for the last year. We fulfilled our duty of care to him.

Now, there is a rule which forces us to release this asset to go and play in a FIFA tournament. Out of our hands. We have no say in it. Lo and behold, FIFA and his national team are negligent in their duty of care, ruin the asset which we own, and return him to us in an unusable state. Quite apart from having to start counselling him from square one again, it's a fucking insult that they ban him from playing for us.

You have to be fucking kidding me. They'd damaged one of our assets through some obvious negligence. A witness statement from Suarez will be plenty evidence for that negligence. So we should sue them for that. He's worth at least £20m less than when he left. I'd get that money back of someone. I'd get the £2m in increased medical costs treating his mental illness. And the ban? Fuck off, they can shove that up their corrupt dick hole, otherwise it's another £20m. It's that simple. Negligence.
 
Because you see, FIFA and Uruguay knew those exact same risks when they called him to play in their bullshit tournament. They knew the risk that they could ruin an extremely expensive asset without due care. They took that risk. I'd make them pay for it.
 
A massive fine and a two year international ban would have been a pretty good deterrent. He loves playing for his country
 
But how can the act be properly punished without LFC being hurt..? If it's an International ban only, that's what? 5 games a season? That's no deterant. It comes with the territory. If there's anger to be apportioned out, surely 95% should be sent Suarez's way, with just a little bit belonging to FIFA?

Question (to all): Did Diouf disgrace our club when he spat on that Celtic fan?

I said what I thought was a "fair" ban.

International ban - one year
CL ban - one season, avoids him facing the same player, punishes his ability to play on the biggest club stage.
Large fine - taking into consideration sponsorship monies earned during the World Cup.
 
If a player is injured on international duty and cannot play for the club who pays his salary, then doesn't the national association have to pay compensation to at least cover his wages while he is out & potentially to cover loss of value to the owning club?

(Its a genuine question - I don't know what the rules are)

If that is true then isn't there a case for the Uruguayan FA paying compo to LFC?
 
Back
Top Bottom