Moneyball won't win the Premiership 2012-13

and the thing about tackles with "intent" to harm is that there's never a shortage of players, managers, match officials, ex-pros queueing up to say that any particular studs-at-knee-height shocker was never intentional

idk NV, how many of the ten matches would you put down to that effect? i'm def. more acknowledged as cpt defend a racist/sexist/satanist obv, so purely on the case provided and leaving our dastardly reps out of it

It's pretty difficult to prove that a leg-breaking tackle was deliberate and bad tackles are something that always happen in the course of a game. It's a stupid comparison

the word of an ex-player in the determination of 'intent' to hurt another player is as little to be regarded as the notion of 'intent' to begin with- cf our thread on the tackle and us all p. much agreeing that when you're hurtling towards another another player with the likelihood of doing harm then fk an 'intent'

but that's besides this, suarez obv getting done for so blatantly refusing to keep his nose clean after last year's heavy scenes

let me get it straight then

biting > racist abuse >>>>> trying to end somebody's career/ability to walk

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 14:23 (28 minutes ago)let me get it straight then

biting > racist abuse >>>>> trying to end somebody's career/ability to walk

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 14:23 (28 minutes ago)let me get it straight then

biting > racist abuse >>>>> trying to end somebody's career/ability to walk

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 14:23 (28 minutes ago)let me get it straight then

biting > racist abuse >>>>> trying to end somebody's career/ability to walk

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 14:23 (28 minutes ago)let me get it straight then

biting > racist abuse >>>>> trying to end somebody's career/ability to walk

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 14:23 (28 minutes ago)

bears repeating. ridiculous from FA

Getting done for being subject of an ongoing media outcry as much as anything. Hazard would've got this in February if the tide hadn't abated just in time.

hazard hadn't a seven match ban incident and ensuing (compounded through several ridiculous incidents during investigation) hanging over him from last year

biting after racist incident >>>>>>> legbreaker

^ the actual scenarion, which btw i still don't agree with, but this is not a standalone bite vs racism incident and let's not even

ad hominem bullshit though! play each ball on its merits

nah, i'm all for refs taking a player's previous into account ont eh pitch n all tbh

anyway, it's a pity a player of his talent is gone from the league now, but cmon it's hard to have any sympathy

If Suarez doesn't bite someone for no reason then he gets 0 games and doesn't miss the start of next season, yes the ban may seem a little excessive but why is Suarez deflected of all blame yet again, he can do no wrong on here, others are always moaned at first then it becomes a "poor Luis, he should leave the country" warcry, as if he was forced to do what he done.

Unlikely as it sounds for someone with nearly 10,00 posts on RAWK, this guy OTM.

darragh-
don't think i'd attribute the severity of the punishment to that sentiment. i kinda think it underlies some of the media/fan/pundit furore and that furore has some impact on the punishment.

Number None-
here's how "serious foul play" is to be interpreted:

A player is guilty of serious foul play if he uses excessive force or brutality
against an opponent when challenging for the ball when it is in play.
A tackle that endangers the safety of an opponent must be sanctioned as
serious foul play.

"intent" isn't mentioned. if Suarez's bite is serious foul play - it falls into the category of "excessive force or brutality", sure - then it belongs to the same category as tackles exhibiting "excessive force or brutality". the outcry and this punishment imply to me that biting is considered somehow more excessive or brutal than tackles that could potentially break legs. i don't see that. maybe i'm being obtuse.

altho darragh is right, of course this is because Suarez has previous. to some extent.

i agree with you about the seriousness of this incident (negligible), and i'm all for twenty match bans for serious foul play

that said, i can see why people might wish to draw a distinction between tackles that cross a line and incidents that have nothing to do with the actual game- biting, striking, butting, spitting, verbals that go beyond the acceptable (whatever that is deemed to be).

obv there's grades within grades of what's serious, but to put this as an isolated incident vs the 'serious foul play' rule isn't really being reasonable about it

i dunno man i think if you move too far away from the prospect of serious injury or assault then you're on some "outraging public decency" weirdo morality shit and i'm pretty sure morality's got no place in the Prem and that's how they like it

i mean, those pitiful pseudo-headbutts you get when two bigs front up to each other sometimes are clearly less within the remit of playing football but i don't think anybody ever had to retire or take 12 months out cos they got nudged in the face by Chris Iwelumo or someone

I've just remembered - the booking Suarez picked up for the handball put him in line for a ban for aggregated yellows, I'm sure. So that on top will really put a dent in Liverpool's season next year.

we don't disagree on what we'd like, as far as it goes, but i just don't think that there's any surprise in this sentence or that it's not p justifiable. if the FA declare that everything goes except physically endangering an opponent from next season on then i'll hurrah as loudly as anyone, and j carragher will sign a new three year deal.

i highly doubt he'll wait around aldo....

if Suarez was a rugby dude his coach wd've dropped him for not coming away with the elbow in his mouth, this is all some "gentlemen vs players" 1950s shit imo

except i agree it was a red if the ref had seen it. 4 matches wd be plenty.

maybe he can serve those concurrently

xxxxxp

nah in an ideal world the fauxbutts and nibbles would be worth a ref slapping them in the face once each and warning them to go hard or go home

we are as one on this issue then

yep. but with an acknowledgement from my side that we all know that this isnt the case and that biting an opponent is gonna get you above and beyond a violent tackle.

oh i know how it works in the real world i just hate the FA

done!

If that was his last game it's a hell of a way to go out. Almost gascoignelike in execution.

And btw oi! Nobody mentioned the beauty of Sturridge's goal, I only picked it up off motd2 last night. Here I was taking the acclaim for rvp's second at face value.

best use of pharrell, kudos

i dunno man i think if you move too far away from the prospect of serious injury or assault then you're on some "outraging public decency" weirdo morality shit and i'm pretty sure morality's got no place in the Prem and that's how they like it

― we're up all night to get picky (Noodle Vague), Wednesday, 24 April 2013 16:16 (1 hour ago) Bookmark

this is exactly it though. biting isnt more excessive or brutal than tackles and racism but it is fundamentally less uh... human. taboo is taboo idk

yeah the whole psychosocial thing about biting v kicking is my fave part of this

that and still waiting for a news story about some kid biting another one in a playground kickabout

i do agree psychotic tackles and racism should also get 10 game bans if that's what we're arguing

funny how spitting gets similarly damning rhetoric but not actually the total vehemence

basically the point of interest is at what point, if it happened to you, would you no longer call the perpetrator a cunt but a wrong un

amused that ITT folks are still surprised by arbitrary decisions from FA?

Spitting gets more vehemence from the ex pros imo?

spitting is disrespectful innit. like pissing on sb or pooing but less severe. don't know where jizzing would come (so to speak)

biting is just kind of.. weird?

OTM

It's more intimate, you catch what they have, vice versa, at least the perpetrator opens himself to the risk.

Strange thing for a grown man to do nonetheless

the success of his kissing wrist meme got to his head and he thought he'd push the boundaries

He loves his little daughter so much he's moved on from kissing his name on her wrist to acting like a toddler - that's what I call empathy

that and still waiting for a news story about some kid biting another one in a playground kickabout

already happened! i'll dig the article out.

hooray!

backup for spitting being worse from everyone's favorite red head dumbass http://www.mlssoccer.com/news/article/2013/04/22/biting-still-not-worse-spitting-says-espn-analyst-alexi-lalas

"everyone's favorite red head dumbass"

Neil Lennon and John Hartson both got something to say about this tbh. Tho of course in a purely descriptive sense this moniker could only ever belong to Scholes.

What? No talk here of Mourinho's return to Chelsea? So much awesomeness ahead!

I know it's Bild, but they have been pretty accurate lately w/r/t football. Bild also says Falcao will join Chelsea.

He was pretty classy in his interrogation afterwards tonight. Is it reported as a done deal? Because leaving Real after such a comprehensive failure (assuming they can't turn it round) is a bit unJose

Not a done deal, but it's Bild Fussball, and it is quite clear that Mourinho's project at Madrid has failed. He will most likely not win a prize this season now, he's been wrecking havoc all season (Cassilass-Gate etc). Leaving seems to be the only option, so it makes sense.