would be

[Peter R]

X,

This is not about LFC, IMO. This is about the integrity of the sport we love to watch. Are you suggesting that a ban should not extend to club level?

Again, IMO, In the interest of sport and sporting behaviour Suarez should be banned in the same way T&T athletes are banned for doping. Biting is his drug and he needs to clean up his act. If it hurts the club so be it... I don't know how contracts are written but there should be something in there that if a player is banned because of these types of incidents (biting, punching, kicking, head-butting, spitting on, another player) they receive only a fraction of their salary...

So I see it!

[Gamma]

There are usually bringing the game/ club into disrepute clauses ....

[Sir X]

Have you lost your mind Peter ? This is about football and liverpool -prem league, C.L and FA campaign is a part of that .

Step back , take a deep breathe and exhale.This is business and yes ,part of it is an image issue, nothing that a PR team cant rectify.Personally I want him sold but! it must be where pool gains, something from it.Saurez banned from International football for 2 to 4 years suits BIG CLUBS WELL!

Thats value, which BIG CLUB wants to spend the money to rehabilitate him for a CL or League campaign is another issue.Pretty sure movements are going on as we type behind the scenes, the question for pool what would we consider a valued decision as it pertains to Saurez.

Surely banning him from LFC club foot ball is not.

[Rockman]

That may very well be the case Paul Marin.
Whether intervention would make a difference isn't clear though.Suarez transgressions are spaced...,those gaps can be wrongly attributed to the manager, at the time,making the difference.
Besides,Suarez had to confront video evidence in each of his misdeeds yet from time to time he repeats the....,surely thinking it escaped the lens of ubiquitous camera(s).
Penalties never worked,and ultimately it will be the choice of deterrent.

[Paul Marin]

X,

This is not about LFC, IMO. This is about the integrity of the sport we love to watch. Are you suggesting that a ban should not extend to club level?

Again, IMO, In the interest of sport and sporting behaviour Suarez should be banned in the same way T&T athletes are banned for doping. Biting is his drug and he needs to clean up his act. If it hurts the club so be it... I don't know how contracts are written but there should be something in there that if a player is banned because of these types of incidents (biting, punching, kicking, head-butting, spitting on, another player) they receive only a fraction of their salary...

So I see it!

Peter, don't bother trying to explain it to X_lfc_fan, he will never understand the guiding principle you are trying to uphold. He's off as usual on a tangent beating his chest over something (i.e. protecting Liverpool) that everyone else understands is a given. At the end of the day, Liverpool paid £23m for Suarez so any gain above that acceptable to John Henry is fine with me...regardless of what X_lfc_fan (also known as X_uberant_City_Man) has to say.

[Peter R]

Have you lost your mind Peter ? This is about football and liverpool -prem league, C.L and FA campaign is a part of that .

Step back , take a deep breathe and exhale.This is business and yes ,part of it is an image issue, nothing that a PR team cant rectify.Personally I want him sold but! it must be where pool gains, something from it.Saurez banned from International football for 2 to 4 years suits BIG CLUBS WELL!

Thats value, which BIG CLUB wants to spend the money to rehabilitate him for a CL or League campaign is another issue.Pretty sure movements are going on as we type behind the scenes, the question for pool what would we consider a valued decision as it pertains to Saurez.

Surely banning him from LFC club foot ball is not.

What I am saying is that if the club suffers then clubs generally will take a harsher stand with their players who commit certain offences than currently obtains. I am looking at the BIG picture of how I think football should be played. In the past I have "stood up" for Suarez and given him the benefit. I never did with the Ivanovic biting BTW. What I am saying, in hindsight, is that maybe ten games was too few a number of games for that banishment. half the season or more. You think if he had had a twenty match ban he would have bitten again? especially if it were made known that a subsequent similar offence would result in an even longer ban in ALL competitions?

[Islandman]

If he has a psychological disorder of some sort, which is a strong possibility in my view, then a 20 or 30 game ban might not make a difference in his behaviour if he doesn't get treatment.

Nobody who is thinking clearly does what he did. I don't think he is in control of himself.

[Peter R]

True. A rational person might have put that behind him already. Him nuh have no shame... an dat is what bodda me...after all that people have gone through to defend and rehabilitate certain behaviours, you pull dat sh1t!? Ahhh bwoyy.

[Tilla]

LFC couldd cancel his contract if he is suspended for two years.

[Karl]

1st Yuh need to be honest wid yuhself.You have mental issues and I am serious as it pertains to poool,its obvious obvious to every and anyone Saurez will be banned a long while from international football, why would you wish it on Liverpool club level? Knowing full will cost us a a lot ,probably top 4 plus money to subsidize his salary ?

Saurez getting a lengthy ban from international football serves pool interest it drives up his price in that he will be available exclusively for club football without FIFA football dates.

Admit it Yuh know what don't keep posting suh everyone can read Yuh as a fraud... 5 the columnist.

Conclusion liver pool can sell or hold him or hold him knowing they will get full or above value.

Yuh nuh read dis or Yuh being typical 5th columnist?

It is the usual for a player to have clauses in his/her contract that address bringing the club into disrepute...engaging in behavior that reflects poorly on or injures the club. If by this act Suarez cannot represent Liverpool, trust me Suarez's earnings would suffer.

Your club could even have had a rewriting of his contract after his previous indiscretions that makes him having to pay the club damages

Trus mi Liverpool's financial interests and legal position on same in hands of 'quality legal team'.

[Sir X]

Try and spin wanting Saurez banned from LFC...lol...di site know yuh,Peter catch imself ...now yuh a come wid sale price i.e valuation , after asking that he be banned on principles yuh trying to uphold ?....If he is banned at LFC wouldnt that ban transfer to another club ?...THINK ...5th columnist ,suh yuh 23 million dollar is what you have reduced a man that took us to two games from winning the prem to......hmmmmmmmm?.....post some more , keep the madness coming.

Lets get one thing out the way, everyone at pool wants Saurez sold for a valued price, except you !

[Paul Marin]

Try and spin wanting Saurez banned from LFC...lol...di site know yuh,Peter catch imself ...now yuh a come wid sale price i.e valuation , after asking that he be banned on principles yuh trying to uphold ?....If he is banned at LFC wouldnt that ban transfer to another club ?...THINK ...5th columnist ,suh yuh 23 million dollar is what you have reduced a man that took us to two games from winning the prem to......hmmmmmmmm?.....post some more , keep the madness coming.

Lets get one thing out the way, everyone at pool wants Saurez sold for a valued price, except you !

LOL!! If you really believe that I want Liverpool to be hurt in all this you are an idiot, not an eejit. I have never given up on my club EVER!!! Have you? KMT. Run go back a City ... you were found guilty, so stop trying to shub uself eena fi wi business.

[Sir X]

You want him banned from LFC and you want him sold for at least 23 million dollars on principle ?


Yuh show yuh true colors, nuff said continue to post at your risk.

XPOSED !

[Paul Marin]

You want him banned from LFC and you want him sold for at least 23 million dollars on principle ?


Yuh show yuh true colors, nuff said continue to post at your risk.

XPOSED !

If that is how you interpret what I said, and you can read, then you are a fool, incapable of deciphering the nuances of a more highly intellectual being. You are on par with a caveman using books for firewood...but hey, what should we xpec from City folk? Nuff said.

[Sir X]

We both agreed that Suarez should NOT be allowed back for anything less than the maximum 24 month ban. And that should include club football (I know, this hurts my beloved Liverpool team).


Liverpool paid £23m for Suarez so any gain above that acceptable to John Henry is fine with me.

Its easy to tell when a man has lost the debate he resorts to name calling.Are those above your post ?