Jump to content

Recommended Posts

Parkdrive Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> red devil Wrote:

> --------------------------------------------------

> -----

> > *sits on hands...*

>

>

> Say what you need to say, both are quotes from the

> same "little boy", and the Defoe bite went off

> with out much of a fuss. I don't advocate such

> behaviour by either player, just stinks of

> inconsistency.


Perhaps because suarez has plenty of previous and for defoe it was an unsightly blot on an otherwise spotless copybook


Either way- the overeaction is laughable.


It was petulant and a little pathetic from suarez; a reaction born out of frustration and certainly no worse than a two footed, studs showing lunge on another players shin (potentially career ending).

Jah Lush Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> Nah! It's just that Van Pussy and Defoe play for

> the two clubs PD hates the most.



Not all Defoe got away with it all more or less, and Van Pussy is a c**t. 10 matches for a bite and yet Ben Thatcher got 8 for his assault on Mendes, Aguero gets off scot free as did McManaman on Haidara. That isn't just or fair.

Otta Wrote:

-------------------------------------------------------

> 10 matches is a fecking joke! Yes he was a moron,

> and yes he deserves a ban, but I hope Liverpool

> appeal this, how can he get a bigger ban for this

> than they gave for the racism charge?!?


That's the FA for you, haven't got a scooby.

I've been doing some swatting and Defoe was booked and because of FIFA's stance on retrospective action the FA couldn't do anything. Defoe had just been fouled 3 times by the same player.


I think Suarez's punishment is harsh though given what some people have got 3 game bans for. I think if you break a players leg for example you shouldn't be allowed play again until that player has recovered. That might get rid of the really bad so called tackles.

Are we in a court?


In any normal workplace your previous warnings and misdemeanours would be taken into account


Minimum ban for biting in rugby is 12 weeks. More of this please.


Problem is they will give a smaller suspension for a worse misdemeanour fairly soon to undermine any good work

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
  • Latest Discussions

    • download-file.mp4  Is this the sort of thing you are after?   
    • Supermarkets have massive volume and tiny profit margins. If this were true Ocado would be dead by the end of the week, surely.
    • The step means Love Dulwich is not disabled friendly though they went to help someone on  crutches up the step last time we were there  much prefer it as a Turkish than café but maybe not for this group   The noise level might be an issue as it’s all hard surfaces though I don’t recall it being noisy. check out Olivelli the menu has a good range  though it’s not the best Italian you can get. There’s also a step up into Maria’s - much smaller but you need to negotiate the step and door at the same time. Olivelli has more room and if I remember right the toilets are on the ground floor. A consideration if steps are an issue The Lordship might be an option. Noise is not usually an issue. We’ve enjoyed various meals there. The ladies toilets are on the same floor as the tables (the gents may be upstairs). The staff are always friendly
Home
Events
Sign In

Sign In



Or sign in with one of these services

Search
×
    Search In
×
×
  • Create New...