2012/2013 English Premier League thread

[Blaster86]

22

[Jagger]

I said it before that I think Suarez is a complete nutter for his latest ridiculous incident and I will not defend him at all.

However I saw this elsewhere and the guy does have a point about how ridiculous the FA are, even taking into account that he's a repeat offender and said nutter:

The FA don't ban McMananam for a potentially leg breaking tackle

Don't ban Aguero for a two footed stamp on someone

Don't ban Rooney for elbowing an opponent in the face

Don't ban Defore for pretty much the same thing

Gave Fellini a three game ban for headbutting someone THREE times (he did admit it and apologize though)

and gave Suarez a 10 game ban.

Showing my age here but Suarez got one more match than Arsenal's Paul David did back in 1988 for breaking Glen Cockerills jaw with a left hook! My how times have changed.

I'll say again, not defending the nutcase, but this is interesting nonetheless.

[Bagor]

I'll say again, not defending the nutcase, but

I remember being told that once the word "but" is inserted into a sentence to disregard everything before it.

What's your point? I'm assuming you think 10 is too much?

And, no Defoe is not pretty much the same thing.

And also, you fail to mention that Suarez was cautioned as to his future behaviour after being done for racial abuse. We could also talk about the stomps and achilles rakes that he has got away with.

[NBC]

Luis Suarez: Liverpool striker's ban highlights past inconsistencies

In handing Liverpool striker Luis Suarez a 10-match ban for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic, the Football Association has clearly sent out a strong signal - yet it has also highlighted its inconsistencies of the past when it comes to disciplinary issues.
How can the same player face an increase of two games for a biting offence compared to the suspension he received for racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra last season?

Before anyone starts to make any comparisons, it may be wise to apply some caution and wait for the publication of the written reasons, which will provide clarification of the conclusions that the panel reached.

It is also worth considering that times change and rules change. The FA has reviewed its discriminatory measures and any future racist sanctions will be much stiffer than 12 months ago.

The FA may face criticism for a lack of consistency, but if this is an organisation which has a governance department in transition then it also serves as a warning that it is toughening up its act.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/22287289

[Addick]

Arseblog has addressed it once again. On his Arsecast the other week, he discussed the FA's Footballing Double Jeopardy. Although it was mentioned as a FIFA directive, I believe it is the FA's prerogative to not review plays that the match-official has already addressed even if it was not addressed properly/correctly.

Originally Posted by Arseblog

Suarze 10 Game Ban Highlights The FA's Inadequacies... Again
25 April 2013
Arseblog.com

Anyway, all the talk this morning is of Luiz Suarez and the 10 game ban he’s been issued by the FA for gnawing on Branislav Ivanovic. If it seems harsh the very obvious answer is that in order for a player to escape a 10 game ban, he ought not to bite an opponent – especially not when he’s had previous with the FA over being racist.

There’s simply no condoning what he did, you can’t find any excuses for it, and on the face of it a 10 game ban isn’t that unreasonable. He bit a man, for goodness sake. A professional footballer, earning as much money as he does, representing his club, acted like a toddler. If he’s got issues and problems with anger, that’s his look out. Liverpool knew he was capable of being all bitey when they bought him, and after a 7 game ban in Holland for the same thing, they can’t get away with acting shocked and surprised over the antics or the outcome.

What makes the whole thing such a contentious issue is that when it comes to the FA, and their completely arbitrary disciplinary system, it doesn’t make sense when compared with other bans. Suarez himself was given an 8 game for being racist, is nibbling an opponent 2 games worse than that? And why was Suarez’s racism twice as bad as John Terry’s who only got 4 games? They might say repeated utterances of the word he used against Evra, but racism is racism – and if there was some linguistic confusion over the Suarez affair, the impact of calling your England teammates brother a ‘####ing black ####’ can’t be obscured in any way.

Complete Post

[St. Pats]

Suarez being banned for 10 games is a surprise to Liverpool? Really? They have condoned the acts of a this lunatic over and over. He has been given a 7 game ban for the very same offense before. Not to mention his other numerous incidents.

The guy needs more than a 10 game ban. He should be in a nuthouse somewhere getting treatment.

[The Big Chill]

That blog hits the nail right on the head.

If the ban for biting is 10 games then I have absolutely no issue with it. But when the FA gives out drastically different punishments for the same offense then there is an issue. Suarez and the FA have combined to put LFC in an unfavorable position here, because while they would probably just like to move on from this situation, they can't, because how can they not appeal this decision?

[moon]

Originally Posted by The Big Chill

That blog hits the nail right on the head.

If the ban for biting is 10 games then I have absolutely no issue with it. But when the FA gives out drastically different punishments for the same offense then there is an issue. Suarez and the FA have combined to put LFC in an unfavorable position here, because while they would probably just like to move on from this situation, they can't, because how can they not appeal this decision?

They cannot appeal because the POS deserves more than 10 games and they should feel extremely lucky that is all he got.

I wish that leagues could give out more games if teams/players stupidly appeal fair or too few games suspensions like this.

[The Big Chill]

Originally Posted by moon

They cannot appeal because the POS deserves more than 10 games and they should feel extremely lucky that is all he got.

I wish that leagues could give out more games if teams/players stupidly appeal fair or too few games suspensions like this.

I thought suspensions could be increased after an appeal?

I get that fans decide on the length of suspensions based on him being a POS, but the FA cannot do that.

[Addick]

Originally Posted by moon

I wish that leagues could give out more games if teams/players stupidly appeal fair or too few games suspensions like this.

Frivolous appeals are penalized with an additional match being added to the original suspension.

[moon]

Did not know that.

I was going off NA sports when guys appeal all the time especially if there is a game they want to play in that could be affected by suspension.

[Jagger]

Originally Posted by Bagor

And, no Defoe is not pretty much the same thing.

.

No, I'll give you that, it's completely different. They were already on the turf when it happened.

My point was how ridiculously inconsistent the FA are. That's all.

Whatever, I would be completely fine with Liverpool selling the player. He's a fantastic footballer when he plays the game but he's been a complete embarrassment to the club. Cliched it may well be BUT no player is bigger than the club. If they can somehow cash in on him I'd do it in a heartbeat.

[NBC]

These are fun:

http://www.givemefootball.com/341979...ntroversial-xi

http://www.givemefootball.com/341933...e-overrated-xi

[d_phaneuf]

I think they got the controversial list spot on but I don't really agree with any of the overrated list except Cleverley

for Cazorla and Hazard they haven't been consistent all season but it's rare when someone comes from another league and is, both are match winners

Nastacic has been better than Kompany this season and he's 20

No one thinks Clint Hill is any good, or that Luiz can defend

[cam_wmh]

Nastaric, Hazard, Dzeko and Carrick are overrated? That writer's a moron.

The writer sure was kind to JT. Could've filled the page just with his antics.

[carom]

Yeah the overrated list is garbage.

Saying Jussi Jaaskelainen is overrated is BS in my opinion. Is he the best keeper in the PL? Maybe not, but he certainly has done well for West Ham this year with some great games. And really, they don't seem to have any faith in the second keeper as it appears to me that he has played more minutes than any other keeper in the PL. In the first season back in the PL Jussi is a big reason why West Ham aren't fighting to survive and aiming for atop half of the table finish. What keeper doesn't have a mistake in him?

Maybe I have a soft spot for Finnish keepers

[d_phaneuf]

If England are ever going to win a major tournament this decade Joe Hart is going to have to be a major reason why

but for now.... we still have to qualify, can Foster at least get a look until Hart is back in form?

[Barnet Flame]

Originally Posted by agulati

Arsenal have to find a way to start retaining their stars. .

It's too late for that now.

[d_phaneuf]

Originally Posted by Barnet Flame

It's too late for that now.

the only one left who I think there would be any anger (Cesc/RVP level) is Wilshere probably

[Bagor]

Yeah, it is too late.

Ideally Arsenal need someone like Britain's richest man (if his noises are to be believed) to buy Kroenke out and get on, never mind take control of the board.

Alisher Usmanov criticises board for turning Arsenal into feeder club
• Russian wants Arsène Wenger backed in transfer market
• Shareholder unhappy about the sale of best players

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...al-feeder-club

Alisher Usmanov 'dreams' of taking total control at Arsenal
• Russian billionaire has 30% stake in club but no seat on board
• Usmanov backs Wenger and calls Van Persie sale 'a mistake'

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2...ger-van-persie

Originally Posted by diane_phaneuf

If England are ever going to win a major tournament this decade Joe Hart is going to have to be a major reason why

but for now.... we still have to qualify, can Foster at least get a look until Hart is back in form?

At least Captain Terry is coming back to right the ship?

Keane wasn't far off on his comment on Hart a good few months back although I think it might be more a case of complacency than cockiness.