Suarez is an idiot who deserved everything he got but the FA are still a shambles of an organisation.

No one is disagreeing on that

Redreason

So we're going to ignore Ivanovich & Suarez coming to blows in the tunnel, or the two baiting each other for 60 mins.

Blame the FA for not acting, hence this article is about it not your usual Spurs hating

---

Blame the FA - that's what we doing.

We know the Ref brandished yellow card for the tackle and melee not the biting incident. But, incompetent FA didn't ban Defoe..



As I said I dont advocate it and think defoe got off lightly, yet looking at the 2 suarez incidences (again watched them before I commented) he simply just bites with no obvious reasoning
--

I thought Ivanovich was trying to block Suarez with his arms, no?

Red - man 23 - In all honesty I watched the match and if anything Ivanovic should have bitten suarez. Because it was suarez who was having the swipes. I cant comment on the tunnel incidence as I dont know the details.

Sorry but from what I saw Ivanovic 'owned' suarez and his response was to swipe and eventually bite.

provocation comes in many forms but doing your job isnt provocation

Maf your opinion as a West Ham fan isn't valid I'm afraid, you have to have some sort of football knowledge first

Didi sums it up for me... Suarez should be banned and has done this before so they obviously took this into consideration and his past bans by the FA... then they came out and said no past issues were considered..

dont lie about it... and the funny thing is i think they have lied to make themselves look better but actually it makes them look worse... they cant even lie well!!

I thought Ivanovich was trying to block Suarez with his arms, no?
-----------------------------------------------------------
no

Even I admit 10 games is really really harsh! I would have suggested 6 with some counseling or anger management, he has issues there's a thin line between wanting to win and reacting the way he has

Defoe should have got banned for his bite too. He didn't. That doesn't mean that should be the benchmark.
===========================================
Obviously not, but the FA deemed it at the time, to be not particularly important enough to revisit, or even try to revise their own rules over the years that followed, and in turn did nothing to stop Defoe playing for the FA's England a couple of weeks later, which they could have done, if they wanted to.
Instead they opted for, 'its not really in the spirit of the game', while your chairman, and the manager at the time thought it not deserving of a club fine, and a 'bit of a joke', and 'part of the game'.
Low and behold, 6 years later, everybody is horrified, the FA call the incident exceptional, and deserving of as longer ban as they see fit, through the guise of an independent panel.
The reasons they give for the length of the ban range from 'Twitter trending worldwide', and the fact, 'they didn't like his apology much'.
As others have said, nobody has a real problem with the length of the ban, he was an idiot, and deserved what was coming to him, but the FA's duplicitous, and freehand way of going about things has to be addressed.

Redreason

Isn't tackling, regardless of whether its legit or not, 'doing your job'. How many players have taken another out to 'let him know you're there' or to break up play?

How can you cite the Masch tackle as Defoe being provoked. But state Ivanovich getting at Suarez as 'just doing your job' and Suarez biting him 'out of no where'?

Jlou they have to stamp down though, the FA have evolved since 2006, delusional in some aspects but you have to agree that this ban is needed

I wonder though, as Suarez hasn't appealed like in Ajax which makes me think he has an eye on leaving?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ietTo97eHGQ

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4KcUyc5rMM

comment by ThuddSpur (U1029) posted 16 minutes ago
The FA look at PRIOR events, they look at the bite and the length of the ban as a BASIS for the upcoming ban
----------------------------
No. Read the report.

Jlou

That's it in a nut shell.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=1jrEgRI8qj0

Red-man -- mate if you think that is what is being said then good luck to you

He usually makes good articles, but this one is very misguided. He even claimed John Barnes is a racism expert and if he has a view on racism then it's the correct one.

oh by the way another of thier reasons was that he went on to score the winner and celebrate this... apparently this showed that he didnt understand or feel guilt about what he did...

what it showed to me was that it is his job to scores goals so that what was he did... !!

what he should of done is caught the ball instead of heading it and give the ball to the chelsea defence in apology.. surely this is the only way he could show his shame art this time!!!!!!

And the disgusting thing is, Police visited Ivanovic after that incident.. but why did they miss Defoe?

And Spurs fans are taking moral ground on Defoe telling it's a nibble..

John Barnes speaks too fast.

Thudd

"Jlou they have to stamp down though, the FA have evolved since 2006, delusional in some aspects but you have to agree that this ban is needed"

No the ban was needed in 2006, and in the case of the Chester player was enforced. So biting, back then, was an issue. The FA in their wisdom didn't think it was a problem that needed cracking down on. Fast forward to 2013 and, according to the report, it's something they do want to crack down on, and send a message out.

I dont understand what posting these incidents achieve when at least two of us Liverpool fans have stated that his past incidents should have/have been taken inot account...

YET THE FA STATED THAT THEY WERE NOT...

non of us are defending Suarez but that doesnt seem to go in....!!!!!

But thats the whole point, they havent evolved.
They didn't look at the rules that saw Defoe get away with what he did, didn't implement their own ban on him at an international level, as they could of, their language in response to the Defoe incident was soft, apologetic, and evasive.
2006 wasn't that long ago, but long enough to revise, or change directives, and rules within the FA, to avoid players hiding behind retrospective rules within the game, which they chose not to do.
Really is no excuse.

Mr C

Mr Chelsea ✪ (U3579)
posted 9 seconds ago
John Barnes speaks too fast.

--------------------------------------------------------
bit racist