10 Jan 2013

'He should've confessed' - Fair play legend slams 'wrong' Luis Suarez. Fair...?

Swindon manager Paolo Di Canio has criticised Liverpool striker Luis Suarez for failing to confess to the referee that he handled the ball during the Reds' controversial 2-1 FA Cup victory over Mansfield Town.

As a West Ham player, the fiery Italian won the FIFA fair play award in 2001 when he opted to catch the ball rather than shoot when Everton goalkeeper Paul Gerrard was on the ground injured.

In an interview with BBC today, Di Canio insisted that 'he would act' if one of his players did something that was seen as 'bad sportsmanship', and on the Suarez issue, he argued:

"Luis Suarez has received a lot of criticism for handling the ball before scoring Liverpool's second against Mansfield in the FA Cup. For me, a player has to be genuine at all times. If, after one second, a player realised what he had done was dishonest, then he should tell the referee. It is not fair to take advantage of such a situation. So if Suarez did it intentionally and realised he was wrong, then in my opinion he should have confessed".

Obviously, I totally agree with this. As I argued in previous articles on the subject, it's definitely possible that Suarez did not deliberately intend to handle the ball; however, he could've done his reputation a world of good by simply telling the referee what happened. It's not as if it would've made any difference to the result. The goal still would've stood, just like the Robbie Fowler penalty decision against Arsenal in 1997 still stood, despite the LFC legend's protests.

If Suarez had done that, I would've been the first person to write something praising his sportsmanship. I remember watching at the time thinking 'Please, Luis! Make some kind of gesture to show that you know it's unfair'. Instead, the Uruguayan added insult to injury by tactlessly completing his usual goal celebration.

The lack of sportsmanship is not Suarez's fault per se; this is modern football. Players don't care about fair play, and fans certainly don't care...except, of course, when it's their team on the receiving end of a dodgy incident.

In my view, the response to this incident shows that the club and its fans have learned absolutely nothing from the Patrice Evra situation, the response to which was characterised by the same narrow-minded insularity, pigheaded defensiveness and total lack of humility.

Liverpool fans have venomously rejected any and all criticism of Suarez's Mansfield handball, and his reaction to it, but you can be damn sure that hypocrisy will rear its ugly head if the same thing happens this Sunday against Man United.

For the sake of argument, let's say Robin Van Persie scores the winning goal for United by handling the ball over the line. Will Liverpool fans - and Rodgers - just accept it magnanimously, defend Van Persie, and think up a hundred different ways to rationalise the unfairness of the goal?

Get real! If that - or some other costly unsporting act - takes place, there will be blood on the streets of Liverpool as fans foam at the mouth over the injustice of it all. It's hypocrisy of the highest order, but that's football for you.



REMINDER: Any post containing any kind of insult, sniping or derogatory comment against Di Canio, Suarez, or the site will be deleted.

Jaimie Kanwar


165 comments:

  1. Oh I am bored of this handball now. How many times do you see handballs happen in football, and how many people own up to it.
    I get your point that he could have and probably should have owned up to it, but seriously, its just dragging on too much now, and IMO its dragging on because its Suarez, and im not specifically talking about this site.
    If RVP does it on Sunday, yes I will be annoyed. But I bet you people wont talk about it for half as long.

    ReplyDelete
  2. So basically you are saying that every defender who grabs someone's shirt in the penalty box should claim a penalty against them,.... and every player involved in an off the ball foul should scream for a yellow or red card, right?

    What's it like in La La Land mate?

    ReplyDelete
  3. Should Suarez have confessed to handballing? Yes. Should have every player in history who has committed any unnoticed wrong-doing confess? Such as when a defender blatantly fouls an attacker, but the incident is waved off? Yes. I'm not trying to defend Suarez, I'm just absolutely sick of the unfair, heavy spotlight on him. In the future, how about we try and fix these smaller, but more consistent problems as well, such as when players call for corners/throw-ins, even though they know they were the last to touch the ball. I do agree that confessing would have been a way better thing to do for Suarez's own sake, but the backlash against him on this has been way out of proportion, especially when you consider this incident would have been forgotten about much quicker, if it were a mansfield player or someone like henderson.

    ReplyDelete
  4. For me I don`t understand all the media stuff over this, I don`t think there is one footballer in any of the top leagues who would have said to the ref no no that hit my hand and wasn`t a goal.

    This isn`t me being biased as I would under it the same if RVP scored like that against us.

    I do think it is wrong, but football like life is just like that. It is the same for diving, do you ever hear Bale say to the ref afrer, sorry I dived? nope. Cheating happens, and while it would be lovely if ALL footballers were honest, they aren`t, they want to win, and this is why we have refs. If ALL footballers were honest, we wouldn`t need them, as each player would be owning up to each foul, each handball and everything else. The only thing we would need them for is to time the game, and give offsides on the cue of the linesman, as even a honest footballer can`t see if he is offside or not as he is looking at the ball and running etc.

    ReplyDelete
  5. If RVP scores by handball on the weekend, will every hack journalist still be calling him a cheat weeks later, I dont think so.  But I be we will be dredging this up for months

    ReplyDelete
  6. No, that's not what I'm saying in the slightest. You've just tried to muddy the waters like so many others. I'm saying that any player who scores a goal with his hand (!) should display some fair play and tell the referee about it. Is that too much to ask?

    ReplyDelete
  7. I will be totally honest with you Jamie, if that did happen I would be very frustrated but I wouldn't have a go at the player or the club. The frustration would be related to inconsistent officials etc. We have suffered many poor decisions over the years and benefited from many, so until changes are made to help officials we have to accept it's swings and rounabouts.
    If Mansfield had scored the way we did the media reaction would have been totally different as would the reaction from you.

    ReplyDelete
  8. in my opinion... Nobody asked or cares for his opinion so LEAVE IT...... yeah! 

    ReplyDelete
  9.  If RVP handled the ball into the net on Sunday and it was not spotted by the ref i would not blame RVP but the officials at the game

    ReplyDelete
  10. Jamie, this and your article about Gerrard being jealous of Sahin are awful.

    I used to play football a lot, as a striker, and no for a fact i scored mutiple goals that were offside, or i had controlled with my hand etc. Its football. Because for every offside goal i had allowed, i had on onside goal disallowed. You win some, you lose some. If you take this side out of the game, it'll be as boring as cricket, with no talking points after the game.

    As for the Gerrard article, hahaha. Gerrard has just come out and stated how glad he is that Lucas is back, so he can push forward, and you think he refused to let Sahin play deep? Sahin is unfortunately past it. The injury has ruined any chance he had of playing in a high tempo league, as he's not up to it.

    No offence mate, like a lot of your stuff, but not today..

    ReplyDelete
  11. What interests me is why people insist on trying to compare this incident to lots of other issues  that have absolutely nothing to do with it. It's like people are so scared of just addressing this handball issue they have to refer to every other incident under the sun. 'But what about this? What about that?' - Why not just focus on this particular issue?

    Whether Joe Bloggs admitted to diving last months is irrelevant - the question is, should players admit it if they use their hand to score a goal, especially if there was no real intent?

    If there was no intent, then why would a player *not* own up to it, especially against non-league opposition?

    ReplyDelete
  12. Why have you changed the quote from the beeb's website? In the last sentence you''ve removed the bit where he says "if it was intentional" which changes the meaning of Di Canio's opinion. In the original he was saying Suarez should have confessed if it was intentional, in your version he says he should have confessed if he realised he was wrong. Different things.

    The original doesn't fit your agenda so you change the quote without acknowledgement to make it fit? Shoddy.

    ReplyDelete
  13. Yet more exaggeration: barely any 'hack journalists' are calling Suarez a cheat. Second, it's not 'weeks later' either - it's 4 days later. Third, most of the coverage from ex players, managers, refs etc has been *supportive* of Suarez's actions. So what are you going on about? Seems to me you're just slipping into the LFC fan default when it comes Suarez, which is: Suarez is a victim.

    ReplyDelete
  14. Re your last line: that is pure supposition. You don't know that's true. I would've posted the same thing: the Mansfield player should've owned up/displayed fair play etc. 

    ReplyDelete
  15. Has he really done that? Jesus that's very disappointing!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Shocked at the media attention towards Luis for not admitting he used his arm to score the goal. What about FIFA, and the fact that had they introduced some form of replay technology/review system into footy, the officials would have been given the benefit of a reply and the goal would quite obviously have been disallowed. Any thoughts?

    ReplyDelete
  17. Look at the original quote on the Beeb website

    ReplyDelete
  18. While I don't like Di Canio, fair play to him, he has even confessed to be a fascist. Swindon are very brave to employ a fascist. If we had a fascist as our manager, I guess I wouldn't be the only one to turn away from the club in an instant.

    Anyway, well, up to now we still don't know whether Suarez handled the ball DELIBERATELY. The ref thought no, so what exactly should Suarez confess. That the ball hit his hand? The ref knew that already. Lets assume Suarez didn't handle the ball deliberately. Should he confess to the contrary just to please the media (especially the Daily Mail), the Mansfield chairman, not so many pundits and a fascist? I don't think so. Isn't there something like the benefit of doubt, or in legal terms, in dubio pro reo? How come Suarez gets castigated even though no-one know whether he deliberately handled the ball.

    Should Man U win against us in a dubious manner, my guess would be that we move on quicker than e.g. Mansfield and that the media wouldn't even give half as much coverage to the matter as they do now.

    ReplyDelete
  19. Indeed it is, but I have heard a few Mansfield and other supporters say that if it had been, they wouldnt have cared, because they would have won the game.

    ReplyDelete
  20. Jamie, someone on some of your last few topics, is flagging a lot of comments for review, as you have replied to a few, you can see they were all written fine, so you might have someone on here taking advantage of being able to get rid of comments they dont like. Just letting you know, as a lot of time goes into some of my comments, and it is a shame for them to go.

    ReplyDelete
  21. Ahhh he has as well..cringe..

    ReplyDelete
  22. It doesn't change the meaning at all, especially if you consider the preceding sentence about 'realising' if something is dishonest. Suarez knew straight away that he used his hand, yet he stayed silent, which is dishonest. I've added that section back in anyway, even though it makes no difference.

    ReplyDelete
  23. It actually would be nice if there was fair play in football, but unfortunately there isn't. A wild guess of mine would be that there are at least 20 incidents in every match (at least on average) where players should own up and be honest. Why limit it to scoring a goal with the hand.

    ReplyDelete
  24. JK did you actually read the independent panel report and if so did you note the inconsistencies inherent in it which undermined the conclusions,
    it s not pig headedness but anger at the unfairness of it

    ReplyDelete
  25. I know you would have posted that he should have owned up but your reaction would have been different! There is no way you would be calling for a replay to take place and you wouldn't still be posting about it four days later. 

    ReplyDelete
  26. Sorry about that. I've changed the settings so flagged comments don't disappear. I've checked, and you have none being held at the moment. I'll see if I can track down who's doing it.

    ReplyDelete
  27. jk do you recon your ever write a postive article about luis???

    ReplyDelete
  28. Yep. Where I live there is a saying that goes along the lines "the honest one is the stupid one". I don't particular like it, and I don't life to it, but in football it would be absolutely true.

    ReplyDelete
  29. Yet another red herring. It makes no difference to the meaning whatsoever. What is Dicanio trying to say? Anyway, the full quote is actually in the article.

    ReplyDelete
  30. Why did you take it out in the first place? It changes the sense ofbwhat he was trying to say, as I said above. Its also misrepresentation. You said that Di Canio said something, when he actually said something different. Aren't there laws against that kind of thing? Libel maybe?

    ReplyDelete
  31. Seriously? No other football writer on the planet examined the Evra report in more detail than I did, and no other newspaper/blog/website defended Suarez over the FA's conclusions in greater depth than I did. At the top of the page in the navbar, you will find a Suarez/Evra link, and you will see all the articles I wrote at the time.

    ReplyDelete
  32. Just checked it, you are right. Jaimie, I am disappointed. I follow your site for quite a while now, but I didn't expect you would alter statements you base an argument on.

    ReplyDelete
  33. I wouldn't be calling for a replay purely because of the financial and footballing disparity between the two clubs. And I would be posting about it 4 days later if there was something newsworthy to report.

    DiCanio's comments are, IMO, newsworthy. Not everyone has an opinion about stuff 5 minutes after a game ends.

    ReplyDelete
  34. I disagree, because if he did it intentionally its a yellow card and even more hatred directed towards him. But the whole thing happened in a split second, so we know it wasn't intentional. It's up to the officials to spot that, not the players. It's a hard one to know where to draw the line if you think Luis should have admitted. Should players tell the officials every time they foul someone but it isn't called? 

    ReplyDelete
  35. Because it is a large issue than just one case. It is also worth noting you made a reference to a different case in the actual topic, when mentioning RVP, this to me then entitles me to reference a different case as well. It is hardly bring up "every other incident under the sun" as you put, but highlighting ONE other case, ONE often being seen as  a singluar thing, not many (every). 

    The relevance is that, in football and life, people do wing it. That is why in life we have the laws, and police, and in football we have Refs. 

    If you are asking in retrospect, should Suarez after the game come out and say, it hit my hand, then maybe, but it still wouldn`t change the game result. 

    If you are asking why didn`t he in the game, I see no difference as to the other team being non-league or prem league, if you didn`t mean to do it, and the ref didn`t give stop it, why would you own up? just to be honest? As I said, that isn`t how life works, and if it was please explain why we need Ref`s?

    ReplyDelete
  36. This is a non-issue, and doesn't change my argument in the slightest. The mere fact of cutting quotes for brevity doesn't automatically mean the meaning is changed. Furthermore, there is a link to every quote I post, so people can always go and read the original quotes themselves.

    That part of the quote does not change what DICanio is trying to say, not matter how people try and insist it does. His argument is that Suarez should've confessed, and reading between the lines, he basically hints that he did it deliberately, which is why I removed it in the first place.

    ReplyDelete
  37. it may not be someone looking in it a bit more, i just tried editing a post, and it says all edits need checking. So maybe it is just posts that have been edited?

    ReplyDelete
  38. Fair enough and credit for correcting it, but there must have been a reason for you to initially leave it out? Why? Be honest now Jamie! In the manner you would expect a player who has handled the ball to be! ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  39. Ah yes the nazi saluting fair play legend that is Paulo diCanio

    ReplyDelete
  40. I didn't say you weren't entitled to raise the issue, and I didn't refer to you individually; I said 'people'.


    The point is that like so many others, as soon as someone says 'Suarez should've owned up', instead of considering that issue, you attempt to indirectly defend Suarez by using other examples that are not entirely relevant. It's as if you're saying, 'well, other players do X, Y and Z, and nothing happens, so why should Suarez do anything'?
    This is a standard diversionary tactic known as 'Ad Populum Diversion', which is when someone dismisses something buy reference to what another group/person is doing. Examples:
    "Contraception cannot be sinful. Everybody does it. Even Catholics."Or:"Abortion isn't wrong. The UN sanctions it".*Similarly, lots of fans say stuff like 'Why should Suarez own up; other footballers don't when they commit similar acts'.My example is hypothetical, and is exactly the same issue: handballing to score a goal.

    * Note: These are just examples and not my personal opinions.

    ReplyDelete
  41. People refer to previous instances because without thats its just two people saying things that will never agree.
    A past situation adds some form of line to try and follow (obviously when it comes to sports its not a straight line).
    In the perfect world players really should own up to handball. its unfair and it should be owned up to and disallowed.
    But the real question is Why should i admit to it? If you admit to it you should be commended for it and you have named players who have owned up to handballs and unsportsmanlike situations. But for everyone owning up to it theres 1000s that dont and the ones that dont go down in history as match winners whether it be controversial or not (maradona).

    ReplyDelete
  42. What does this have to do with his view on Suarez? Another diversionary tactic.

    ReplyDelete
  43. I don't understand what are you talking about. Suarez did not score a goal with his hand (!!!!). Please look at the video footage, he scored a goal by kicking the ball into the net with his foot. 

    ReplyDelete
  44. I didn't think it was relevant, and it suggested (IMO) that DiCanio believed Suarez did it intentionally (otherwise why say it?), which would've inevitably led to hordes of people hurling insults at Dicanio.

    ReplyDelete
  45.  and do you still maintain that a fair decision was arrived at despite inconsistencies?

    ReplyDelete
  46. That's just Disqus then, I'm afraid. It's a good system but there are quite a few bugs, unfotunately.

    ReplyDelete
  47. Alan - I don't think the FA's overall decision is fair at all, not.

    * Suarez should've been sanctioned for his one use of the word 'Negro', which was proven (he admitted to it himself)

    * Everything else in the report is nonsense, and to find him guilty of using that words 5-6 more times with no evidence to back it up is scandalous and unfair.

    I outlined this - with evidence from the report - in the following article:

    http://www.liverpool-kop.com/2012/01/fa-report-unproven-character-killing.html

    I also strongly argued for Suarez to appeal against the decision.

    ReplyDelete
  48. By the way, do you remember what Darren Bent said after the beach ball goal? He said something along the line "I take it as it comes'. Or Tony Pulis after Crouches NBA goal?  "If Peter gets away with this, briliant." This is what he said. After the Bent's goal, the focus was only on the referee who did not spot the fault, nothing on Bent. And there has been nothing on Pulis either. So why can't everybody leave Suarez alone the same way they did in the above cases? 

    ReplyDelete
  49. Fair point you did say people, just thought it was directly aimed at me, I was wrong, so kudos to you.

    I do understand that you feel it is a case of trying to defend Suarez, and I don`t know how I can show you I ain`t. My reasons for my views on this topic, is that regardless of the player I still feel it is the Refs job, not the players. That isn`t me defending Suarez, as I`m saying I feel the same for all players. It`s not defending cheating either, it is just me understanding that some things happen, and the Refs need to stop them. Cheating is wrong in all forms of life, but it happens. I`m not defending it, just saying that it is Human nature. We as people want to do well, to win things, to do better than another. The Ref just like the police is there to stop us doing these things.

    As I can tell, that due to my view, you seem to think I`m defending Suarez, and I feel no matter what I write, unless it goes with your view, I am somehow grouped as someone who will defend there player no matter what, let me finish with this.

    Suarez does Dive, I don`t like him doing that
    Suarez does lash out too, I don`t agree with that either
    Suarez does Cheat, I don`t agree with this either.

    Hopefully now you will see, this isn`t me defending him, but defending MY view that in any sport, it is the Refs role to stop it.

    ReplyDelete
  50. Doesn't seem to be the case now, whatever the case was previously.
     
    The ignoring of the word intentional, however, remains
     
    And, for the record, Jamie, IF Utd scored a similar goal I would be upset at losing the goal, or poossibly the ref's decision to consider it unintentional, but I wouldn't automatically 'foam at the mouth at over the injustice of it all.
     
    If you disagree, show me the posts where I have demonstrated such behaviour.
     
    And if people came on here and labelled RVP in the way you and others have for that act, I WOULD  argue against them.
     
    I have an LFC bias. I'm a Liverpool fan, which means that I tend to see things from their viewpoint first.
     
    But that doesn't mean I'm not fair minded, blinded, or any of the other labels you regularly allude to in your articles
     
    And I'm not alone either. i think a lot more of us are similar than you give credit for.
     
    Just being critical following your assesment of incidences doesn't imbue you with any additional objectivity over someone who decides not to be critical all things considered. Your arguments to me  suggest that to be the case.
     

    ReplyDelete
  51.  then I do not understand the context of your comment about LFC fans not learning anything from the Evra affair. please explain

    ReplyDelete
  52. He enjoyed his pat on the back,now he is after  another.

    ReplyDelete
  53. I agree it is newsworthy and an interesting debate otherwise I wouldn't bother reading or responding.
    I do think that calling for a replay for the reasons you mentioned is extremely flawed and could be seen as patronising. 
    So when a supposed injustice happens in football a replay should only be pushed for if it is for a much smaller team and for financial reasons?
    The more I think about the whole replay idea the more absurd I find it.

    ReplyDelete
  54. Derogatory? I was neither offensive, rude, or threatening. I was simply counter arguing two articles, to which I differ in opinion. Sorry for any offence taken, but it was not intended.

    I told Jamie i disagreed with his articles on Suarez having to own up, and Gerrard being jealous of Sahin wanting to play deep.

    Gerrard is happy Lucas has allowed him to go forward, so there's no way he would've told Sahin he couldn't play deep. To suggest he is jealous is outrageous.

    As i stated before, For every handball goal we get allowed, we'll have one against us.
    I scored multiple unfair goals during my playing days, but the amount of times i had fair goals ruled out, or was denied penalties, is a far greater number.

    'Offside goals' against Everton and Swansea, 'no Penalty' against Norwich, Longs penalty etc. The list goes on.
    But one time the luck goes our way, we should own up?
    You win some, you lose some.
    If you take the debateable issues out of football, it will become as boring as cricket, with no post match talking points.

    ReplyDelete
  55. I can believe that you individually probably wouldn't react that way, but fans as a collective undoubtedly would. You just have to look at the constant moaning over alleged refereeing conspiracies against LFC this season to know that's true, or examine the fan response to the Suarez-Evra situation last season.

    Again, re RVP, you may individually react that way, but the majority of fans wouldn't. The same fans who defended Suarez would be slating RVP, United, Ferguson, Webb etc, gloriously unaware of the irony.

    I've witnessed this first hand so many times, and I'm sure others have too. Diving is one example: LFC fans regularly slate the likes of Bale, Young et al for diving, yet exonerate Suarez, who according to Rodgers, doesn't dive.

    ReplyDelete
  56. While I do agree with you, I think the reason people wont leave him alone, is that he has a list of cases, so people then focus on him more so. Bent`s goal was a one off, and Crouch rarely does much wrong. Suarez though doesn`t help himself, so after a few things, just like JT, people focus on them more, and spot the bad things they do more. Suarez, isn`t innocent in any of the cases which the media bring to the back pages, it is just that they look at him more than others, so his crimes stand out more.

    ReplyDelete
  57. Jaimie, 

    You have time to write article about what Di Canio said but you didn't bother even mentioning what Liverpool legend Robbie Fowler said. 

    I used to read your blog with interest and it is disappointing to see how your blog has turned into poisonous anti-Liverpool propaganda.

    ReplyDelete
  58. My point is that fans and the club were ultra defensive during that affair, attacking anyone and everyone who had the temerity to question Suarez.

    The club released ridiculously defensive official statements; the players wore t-shirts in support of Suarez; the victim mentality intensified; Dalglish's rudeness to the press intensified, and no one showed any kind of humility or rational response to the situation. It was all Evra's fault; he was the devil, and Suarez did nothing wrong.

    Exactly the same response is now in evidence re the Mansfield incident. Defensive attitude from the club and fans; no humility; Suarez is not at fault in the slightest; everyone's against LFC; club officials making defensive statements (Ian Ayre, for example); absolute refusal to acknowledge the unfairness of the situation by blaming the refs; no apology etc.

    That's what I mean: the club and the fans have learned nothing about the correct way to respond to controversial incidents, and LFC's reputation has taken another hit over this situation.

    ReplyDelete
  59. To be fair Jamie, you have compared this incident to lots of other unrelated issues.

    ReplyDelete
  60. You're spot on, Zanatos. That's why making references to Crouch, Neville et all is just a diversionary tactic and has little merit. They do not have long histories of negative incidents/cheating etc. Suarez does, which is why he receives more attention.

    ReplyDelete
  61. So do you think offering them a replay would have been the right thing to do?

    ReplyDelete
  62. I disagree with Fowler. Why should I write about it?

    Just to show you the pointlessness of your complaint: The official LFC site has posted only stuff that supports Suarez - why have they not posted DiCanio's comments, or showed both sides?

    Simple: like me, they have a view on the issue, and they use quotes that support that view. This is standard practice, yet you give me grief for doing exactly what the official LFC does?

    What is the difference?

    ReplyDelete
  63. It has nothing to do with Suarez. It has to do with you calling him a fair play legend, holding him up as an example for everyone else to follow. Personally, I hope my kids don't grow up looking up to a facist but that's just me.

    ReplyDelete
  64. So bored of this whole debate. 

    ReplyDelete
  65. Absolutely. We're talking about a Premier League team and a non-league team here. It would've been the right thing to do for the following reasons:

    * Super display of fair play and sportsmanship by LFC.

    * This would've generated masses of positive press for the club.

    * Mansfield would've been extremely happy with the offer, and all the negative comments by their hierarchy never would've happened (thus no negative publicity)

    * Reaffirm LFC as the 'peoples' club', a label that used to mean something in decades gone by, but is no longer applicable.

    * Would've been the true definition of the 'magic of the FA cup'

    * Would've shown that LFC place fair play above winning at all costs, a poisonous principle that shouldn't apply against a non-league club.

    I could list more reasons, but you get my point.

    ReplyDelete
  66. I disagree. The word intentionally sustantially alters the thrust of the argument.  It's central to whatever points Di Canio makes.

    And who says he's (DC) decided it was deliberate?
    he says 'If Suarez did it intentionally and realised that he was wrong' , he should have confessed. He doesn't offer an opinion on Suarez at all. merely uses the case to highlight his thoughts on the general issue. Which leads me to your original statement saying Di Canio has criticised Suarez.

    No he hasn't.

    YOU have created that impression with the editorial.

    PS you say that hardly any journalist has called Suarez a cheat. Y ou have put those two words in close proximity, or mitigated with a question mark, at least as much if not more than anyone I can think of.

    Yes , you argued that it *might* have been unintentional. But you then concluded that due to his previous record as you see it, it wa smore likely that he did it intentionally. Hence your statements that he is a cheat 75, or 90% of the time , or whatever the percentage was. That's a legitimate viewpoint to have, but don't use the fact that you conceded the POSSIBILITY of his innocence as proof that you defended him in this. You didn't.

    One excellenmt point was the one about your reaction when it happened. I too hoped that Suarez would do a Fowler, maybe he should have done that, then kissed his wrist after the goal was ruled valid. 

    ReplyDelete
  67. But this is why people do bring some names up. It is hard not to feel aggrieved when certain players who are as bad as Suarez, never get hounded, or given as much attention as Suarez. You could call this a Victim thing, and in some ways it is, it is still a fair point though, it doesn`t take away from the crime commited though.

    To use a different example, I would be mad, if I got a speeding ticket every day of the week for doing 35 in a 30, when 20 other cars were doing the same speed every day in front of me but never got any tickets. I would feel a bit like I am being singled out, HOWEVER I have still commited that crime every day, so am not innocent, and the fact no one else got caught doesn`t make my actions ok.

    ReplyDelete
  68. Maybe its just me but for a lfc website i seem to have seen more negative than positive articles here in the past few months & considering we have one of the recognised worlds finest players in luis all i seem to read are articles slating him, its sad

    ReplyDelete
  69. I think leaving out the part about the handball being intentional absolute changes it. I'll give you a rather exaggerated example to underline the difference (don't blame me, I've written my thesis at an institute of law :-) ). I someone killes someone else intentional it's considered culpable homicide, it he/she does it accidental then it's negligent homicide in the worst case, but can also be considered an accident. Very big difference indeed. And very important when it comes to the degree of sentence. The former is at least a prison sentence, in some countries even death penalty, the latter is a prison sentence in the worst case, but can also lead to as little as a fine.

    Now, thankfully no-one died because of Suarez's handball, although from the media attention the incident gets one might be forgiven for thinking he has.

    I agree with you that, reading between the lines, confessing fascist Di Canio hints (at least) that he thinks it was intentional. Now, I envy him for his mind-reading abilities, because I couldn't tell whether it was intentional or not to save my life. Further I would like to refer to my comment below regarding the benefit of doubt and condemning someone without knowing what went on (in this case in Suarez's head).

    ReplyDelete
  70. I'm telling you the god's honest truth here when I tell you that when this whole thing kicked off, I sat on the fence. I actually wrote a blog about it on the club site saying that we should wait what happens and in the meantime not vilify or excuse Suarez. However, when came to light what had actually happened and the punishment that followed I was and I still am severly peed off. The FA and the referees in the premiership have always had one set of rules for English players and one for foreigners. The examples are a plenty. However, that they would stoop so low as to tarnish a person's reputation just to make a statement, I did not expect. So now the truth is out and it has been established that Suarez did not make any racist remark what-so-ever, I will defend him to the hilt. I will not let anyone calling him a racist or even insinuating there it was partly true that he racially abused Evra slide. Whether on the net, in the pub or wherever. As for our reputation, personally I think we've seen far more people come out in support of Suarez on this one than we have people criticizing him. The sad thing is, had this been Gerrard or Henderson, the xenophobe English media wouldn't go around the globe asking everyone what they feel about the situation but since it's a foreigner they can drag through the dirt, they won't let an opportunity pass them by to try and get people to condemn him.

    ReplyDelete
  71. You called two of the articles 'Awful', and made a snide comment about a previous Gerrard article.

    I don't take offence at those comments, it's a matter or principle. I'm interested in your views on football, not on the alleged quality of the article. Those comments have nothing to do with the points raised.

    I don't go around saying things to posters like 'your comments are awful'. What I think about someone's comment is irrelevant; what matters is the content of what is written.

    I agree that debatable issues make football more entertaining and exciting, though.

    ReplyDelete
  72. It's easy to interpret things like this to suit though isn't it. I have now read the article and could spin it that Di canio is saying that Suarez should only have confessed if it was intentional and that he would not have an issue with one of his players showing bad sportsmanship unless it was really serious.

    ReplyDelete
  73. Yes but what you are saying just does not make any sense whatsoever! Why distinguish between a player scoring with his hand from a defender bringing someone down by pulling on their shirt (for example)? Both are offences under the rules and both should be penalised by the officials if they notice it. So why should the handball scorer have to admit his guilt but not the defender who makes the illegal tackle??
    Bottom line is that it is the REF who should spot these things. To ask for the player to admit these things is just idiotic!

    ReplyDelete
  74. I guess if I just posted positive stuff all the time you'd be happy as larry, right?

    This site has been going for nearly six years now and it amazes me that people still don't get what it's about. The site's motto is 'Critical realism about LFC' - it was set up to take a critical view of LFC and football in general. If you come here expecting endless ass-kissing, ego massaging articles about LFC and its players, then you're going to be disappointed (!)

    ReplyDelete
  75. I'm the last who'd like to defend Di Canio, but it wasn't a nazi salute, but a fascist salute (or Roman salute). Not that fascist are much, or any, better than nazis.

    ReplyDelete
  76. I can't sign into disqus with my macbook pro. i have to use my username as my guest name...

    ReplyDelete
  77. Spot on anteater, like you say, what did he have to confess to? the ref was aqare of the handball, interesting that wales,s manager chris coleman said if a player of his ran up to the ref to "confess" he,d drop him for the next game

    ReplyDelete
  78. Some body obviously asked Di Canio for his opinion, as he was held up as a shining example of fair play.

    personally, I think he realised he wasn't certain to score, but hey...

    ReplyDelete
  79. Strange. I'm using a macbook pro too and I can sign in fine. What happens when you try and sign in on the mac? Do you get any error messages at all?

    ReplyDelete
  80. Coleman's comment is ridiculous, and just goes to who the moral malaise currently damaging football.

    Just think about it: Coleman is basically saying that he would *punish* someone for showing sportsmanship. How is that something to be lauded?! How can anyone support such a view? It's twisted, and totally against any concept of fair play.

    ReplyDelete
  81. boy, what a time i just had reading that...

    ReplyDelete
  82. Hello ? 
    LFC site has Suarez supporting material because it is called LiverpoolFC site.
    You are called Liverpool blog and write everything against Liverpool. 

    What is your objective ? getting more comments and more readers for your advertising revenue ?

    ReplyDelete
  83. yeah Suarez shoudve confessed all his sins to father OBrien at the Holy Church of Jesus Christ...give me a f....break

    ReplyDelete
  84. After a strong case put forward by the defense, the case will be adjourned until further evidence can be brought to light. The prosecution has 3 days to find any new evidence of "what was going on inside Suarez head". If no hard facts can be found, then I judge Judy will throw the case out :-)

    ReplyDelete
  85. Yes, I can see that, and I agree to an extent; the refs need to take action and put a stop to these issues.

    ReplyDelete
  86. But the question is, being the all-round good guy and 'honest' player that he is, why did Crouch just celebrate normally and, why did he not inform the ref of his handball?

    This is, after all, what you expected of Suarez..

    Crouch's multiple handballs were agrguably much more blatant and severe a case of handball. But because he wasn't viewed in a way similar to Suarez, there were NO calls for all the things we're hearing now.

    Nobody asked Di Canio to comment on handballs and owning up that week...

    And THAT's the point. It's not necessarily about suarez being victimised per se, it's about the inconsistency.

    ReplyDelete
  87.  I fully support your view. Suarez is not any different to 99% of players but the real issue is why he gets hounded every time he does something which the others do as well.

    ReplyDelete
  88. Fair enough, I can see that. I accept that I should've posted the whole quote to begin with.

    ReplyDelete
  89. it is true it`s not good. I remember about 4 years ago when it came that one of the portugal managers was giving his players lessons on how to dive during training. I think it was Scolari, but again not 100%.

    ReplyDelete
  90. PS. Great avatar. A fellow Schwarzenegge afficionado :-)

    In recent months, I've been to see Total Recall and Predator on the big screen in London. Frickin' awesome, especially watching them with  hundreds of Arnie fans :-)

    ReplyDelete
  91. Wow so here we are again. The article states taht he should have confessed but you only confess if you have been guilty of something, right? The point is nobody knows for sure if he did it intentionally except Suarez. When I sawi it initially, I thought it was a delibrate handball but the more I see it, the more I am convinced it was unintentional so what does he have to confess to? DiCanio is taking the high ground here because of the incident when he stopped play with the injured keeper. It is a completely different scenario. The guy was obviously badly injured and you would hope that most professionals would do the same in that case.
    In the last paragraph of the article it says what if Van Presie scores a winning goal against us this weekend by handling the ball over the line but Suarez did not handle the ball over the line so the comparison is a bit wide of the mark, 2 different scenarios. Lets kill this ridiculous story please. It is getting boring now.

    ReplyDelete
  92. it sells papers. 

    Just look on this site as a example, any article with Suarez in gets about double the comments of most others, I`m sure Jamie could comfirm this more, as its just from my observations, so might not be factually true.

    Now expand that to say a national TV network or paper, and that is a lot of money brought in.

    ReplyDelete
  93. You edit (delete) this commentator's post for calling two of your articles "awful", but some people on here get away entirely unpunished with spreading outright lies about others who participate in the debates.

    ReplyDelete
  94. You couldn't point out 5 incidents where Suarez has dived in the Liverpool red, over exaggerating contact is different to diving. 

    ReplyDelete
  95. Hypocracy and football should be next to one another in the dictionary. Fans and fickle could also be next to each other. This is the world we live in. If it happens to me, its not fair. If it happens to you - game on! Sadly this is reality. Footy players cheat, I drive too fast and you don't get value for money in society these days. Does it really matter in the long term? Of course it doens't, but without we'd have nothing to troll about and slag off everything and everyone except ourselves....YNWA and lets beat those dam Mancs this weekend!

    ReplyDelete
  96. Suarez's handball was much more blatant that Crouch's, but a long shot IMO. But yes, Crouch should've told the ref.

    The point is that Crouch does not have a long history of diving, cheating and negative incidents! Why would there be a massive inquest into a player who has conducted himself with credit throughout his entire career?

    Suarez has repeatedly been involved in negative incidents throughout his career, which is why there is a bigger fuss when he's involved in an incident.

    This is normal. It is human nature, and it has nothing to do with him personally.

    The same applied/applied to the likes of Roy Keane, Joey Barton, Eric Cantona, and any other football 'bad boy' you can come up with.

    ReplyDelete
  97. Jamie I actually read that what Fowler was trying to do was ensure Seaman didn't get sent off because he was never fouled, here's what he said after about the penalty.
    "As a goalscorer it's part of my job to take it and I wanted to score it. I tried to score. I never missed on purpose. It just happened, it was a bad penalty."
    Folks still want to believe he missed on purpose, now I'm not saying he did not oppose the decision but if he was as concerned as folks think then why not just put the ball in row z. He knew even though he said he was not fouled it would make no difference to the ref's commitment to the decision already made.
    Now also Di Canio is the same player who received an 8 match ban for shoving a referee over and his opinion is based with the benefit of hindsight, easy for him to say sat in a comfy chair giving an interview, also the following deems him not credible to sit in judgement of Suarez
    "From now on I will tell my players to dive," Di Canio told the BBC after the game, against Macclesfield."I'd prefer that they risk getting a yellow card for simulation...... It's not fair but it's the only way to receive something."Does this sound like someone we should be taking notice of when it comes to fair play,,,I think not, in fact you did an article on this very story and when to great lengths to condemn Di Canio,,now a while here you are using him as some righteous person sat on high to judge what is fair and what is not, it's laughable.Why are you notsaying in your article "Di Canio says Suarez should tell the truth yet told his Swindon players to dive, a real case of double standards" ???

    ReplyDelete
  98. No, just because you're not 'guilty' of something (i.e. intent) doesn't mean you can't confess. Irrespective of intention, the goal came about as a result of handball.

    Suarez should've told the ref that.

    ReplyDelete
  99. Please email me with details of this and I will take action.

    ReplyDelete
  100. Think it shouldn't be lauded, but at least it's honest of Coleman. Again I am guessing wildely, but I'd like to think that ferguson, too, would drop a player who confessed a deliberate handball that lead to a goal for his side. At least he'd give him a rollicking he won't forget.

    ReplyDelete
  101. And me, event though I have no kids.

    ReplyDelete
  102. Generally, yo're right, but on this site, lots of comments doesn't necessarily mean lots of pageviews. This article may a high comment count but it's not in the top 20 this week when it comes to pageviews.

    ReplyDelete
  103. Try the Liverpool Echo. They, too, write more positively about us..

    ReplyDelete
  104. Whoa!

    So you're saying this site was SET UP  to be critical of LFC? and football in general?

    So this is where to go when you want to read about bad things to do with LFC.

    Now I know. Explains a lot.

    Nobody wants fawning, ass kissing sites, or sites like a certain Utd based one(I think we all know which one I'm thinking about).

    But one which is designed to be the opposite? I'm sure that's not quite what you mean..

    ReplyDelete
  105. And that's not even mentioning the fact that he fought with one of his own players in the tunnel a few months back and was caught running to the Lazio fans and throwing facist salutes towards the crowd. If only we had more role models like him eh.

    ReplyDelete
  106. Why is it laudable if it's honest? If Gareth Bale comes out and say 'I love diving and do it every chance I can', should be praised for his honesty?

    ReplyDelete
  107. Not set up to be critical, set up to take a critical approach, and when I say 'critical', I refer back to 'critical realism', i.e. trying to remove pro-LFC bias and hysteria when considering issues related to LFC.

    ReplyDelete
  108. And you surely got a lot of stick for that. Much of it well beyond decency. Kudos for not giving in!

    ReplyDelete
  109. If we just answer the question as you wish then Jamie there would be no debate, discussion or anything else other than Yes or No. maybe if these are the kind of answers you want then you should just run a simple poll. The fact you go to great lengths to write your article to me means you want discussion and debate, something other than a simple Yes or No answer, I mean come on, where's the fun in that.

    ReplyDelete
  110. In fairness you probably could pretty easy. He has got a lot better, but he has done some pretty clear dives in his time. 

    ReplyDelete
  111. Carl - why do you think I want people to agree with me? I just don't get that. It's obviously not true. I welcome and encourage disagreement; just because I defend my own point of view (like you and everyone else) doesn't mean I want people to agree with me.

    I definitely want discussion and debate; that's what it's all about.

    ReplyDelete
  112. It's a bit like reading Tripadvisor.

    Far fewer people have a wonderful, trouble free holiday, then come back home and write to TA about it, compared to people with a negative point to make, who will tend to write ad infinitum about their perceived issues.

    That doesn't mean that, because negatives outweigh the positives on that site, that MOST  people have a poor holiday, it would just seem that way if you just read TA and similar sites.

    That's why I don't accept your argument that because you see that behaviour on this site and others, that it represents the majority of fans of LFC, and indeed even the majority contributing here

    ReplyDelete
  113. I wrote that it should NOT be lauded.

    ReplyDelete
  114. Jaimie, Fowlers non penalty was not 1998 it was in March 1997. Just thought i'd let you know.

    ReplyDelete
  115. And in other news... The cleaning lady in McDonalds thinks Suarez should have............   Bla bla bla.

    ReplyDelete
  116. I'll wait until I have stronger evidence. Don't want my case to be turned down :-)

    ReplyDelete
  117. You make some good points, Carl. In hindsight, I think it's clear that DiCanio wasn't being serious about the diving, it was just an angry response to the situation.

    Re Fowler - I agree with you re Fowler missing on purpose. I don't think he did; it was a poor penalty, and I like to think that he subconsciously felt bad about its award and that led to such a poor kick.

    ReplyDelete
  118. I wanna see three Howard Webb penalties so we can get over this issue. Tell me what happens if Suarez comes out and says he DID NOT deliberately try to handle the ball. Do you drop everything? Or do you just continue the raid on Suarez and claim he is a liar? 

    I don't know what the possible solutions are because:

    1) You despise Suarez, see the '10 reasons why LFC should not sign Suarez' article. This is a dichotomy of 'obligate fandom'. You claim to have an objective view but this is clearly false? 

    2) BR and FSG who you are "100% behind" let you down due to a lack of sympathy/remorse/humility which turns more attention on to Suarez.  BR can state it wasn't a handball if that's his opinion. 

    3) Ref ruled it as a goal and if Suarez says he didn't intend to use his hand then you are caught with your pants down because you only have two options from that situation and thats a) brand Suarez a liar or b) drop the situation. 

    4) Because Suarez has cheated in the past it must be assumed that he cheated in this situation. 

    I dislike Suarez when he goes on with those on-field antics, diving, yellow cards, mouthing refs etc but I'm viewing this situation fairly. I also don't care if it was Swindon Town or United. I support BR but not his biggest fan I can tell you. I don't suffer from 'obligatory fandom' or whatever it was. Also I'm not attacking you, I'm just trying to view it properly. 

    There are too many factors in this situation to demand one outcome. It can't really be solved and that's a shame. You just hyperbolise the situation. 

    ReplyDelete
  119. You got me! The three days are already over. The prosecution didn't come up with any further (or any at all) evidence that Suarez did it intentionally. Therefore the case is dropped. Anybody still claiming, or hinting, that he did it deliberately will be sued for abuse of law.

    ReplyDelete
  120. On many occasions when I've been to Anfield (and in a couple of away matches), I've heard LFC fans screaming for Suarez, Gerrard and Torres to dive in the box, and exhorting other players to cheat at everything you can think of (throw-ins, shirt-pulling, scything players down). I've seen fans applauding obvious dives; deleriously celebrating a bad tackle etc. It's a sickness, and it's everywhere.

    ReplyDelete
  121. Thanks. I'll change the article. I posted about it yesterday and had the correct date. Don't know why I got it wrong today.

    ReplyDelete
  122. I agree it would have had those advantages.

    However, also think it's too big a can of worms, like asking for a replay because the Arsenal/Everton Suarez goal was actually onside.

    On a completely biased viewpoint, wouldn't want to fill the coffers of their club following the comments made by Caroline Radford. A bigger contrast from the humility of their excellent manager, who masterminded their comeback  which made LFC seem second best for so long, there couldn't be 

    ReplyDelete
  123. GIVEIT A REST JAIMIE!!!.............YAWN.

    ReplyDelete
  124. Surely it's only dishonest if he did something wrong, if it was accidental (an most folks think it was) then he has done nothing wrong, therefore no crime to own up to, I don't know anyone who has ever owned up to a crime they have not committed. I think he maybe worried that if he owned up that the ball hit his hand the media would then twist this into saying it meant he must have done on purpose then, entrapment.  Also why do we need him to tell us it hit his hand, anyone who seen it on tv by now knows it hit his hand.

    ReplyDelete
  125. Answer me this Jaimie, why do we have Referees?, TO MAKE DECISIONS, right, and Mariner made his, right or wrong, in his view it was THE RIGHT DECISION, so get over it!.

    ReplyDelete
  126. To confess is to admit guilt but if it is unintentional, what is there to feel guilty about so why confess? You say you believe Suarez may have been guilty because of past indiscretions and then give us quotes from Diouf & DiCanio. Can you not see the hypocrisy in that?

    ReplyDelete
  127. to do all as you say above would imply Suarez did something wrong, why not just say "The ball hit his hand and as the rules stipulate, no offence occurred" 
    Why should we offer a replay, if an offence had been  committed then I would agree, but as things stand Suarez is innocent and did not deliberately handle the ball, as already clarified by the officials no matter how much you would appear to want him to be guilty of unfair play. 

    ReplyDelete
  128. 3 key points we're forgetting.
    1) Its not Suarez job to referee the match.
    2) You get a lot of decisions against you as a striker (eg last minute "goal" at Everton so your mindset might be to take the ones that go your way.
    3) THE MOST IMPORTANT POINT............Under the rules the ref needs to give the decision if he feels its a deliberate handball. I dont think it was and nor did the 4th official who saw it and most people dont think it was either. Therefore even if Suarez had said hang on ref I handballed it but didnt mean to, it just hit my arm, then the goal would have stood anyway.

    ReplyDelete
  129. Suarez wasn't the first and he won't be the last player not to own up

    ReplyDelete
  130. Why don't you then? 

    He may have dived on a few occasions but think its wrong to label him a diver as there is considerable contact 99% of the time. I don't like the way he over milks it but most foreigners do. 

    People just love to hate him!

    ReplyDelete
  131. Didn't you compare it to the overmars goal v Sheffield United

    ReplyDelete
  132. Why don`t I? cause tbh I really can`t be bothered to spend the time hunting through old videos. I would rather have my point considered null and void, than lose 30mins looking lol.

    ReplyDelete
  133. To be fair to the ref he wasn't in the best position to see it

    ReplyDelete
  134. I know that this has been mentioned elsewhere but I think it's worthwhile to bring it up again: If Suarez should have confessed to this, should a player confess that he was the last one to touch the ball when it went out of bounds? How about when a defender tugs on a shirt? Or when a player dives? Or when a defender commits a handball? Or when the goalie pulls the ball back after it's crossed the line? Or when a player calls for an offside call when the attacker was onside?

    Pick a sport and this could be applied everywhere when there is a referee present.  The referee is there so that the players are not in a position to police themselves.  Should the players police themselves to some extent? Perhaps.  

    Here's what I would ask everyone: Where do you draw the line? Is is that they should always confess to wrongdoing when they aren't caught? Should they only do it some of time? On certain infractions? At certain moments of the game?

    ReplyDelete
  135.  To be honest I find the above utterly bizarre. It strikes me that you have a point of view, which is not unreasonable, then you fit the facts to fit that point of view.
    I can agree that our PR is just awful but has been since the days of Parry And Moores. Our leadership non-existent and my perception is Werner is Henry's bag man but his title is Chairman and would it not be good if he started chairing.. So lots of problems but I dont understand your comments ,for example re Ayre. He was either embarrassed or not. If he was he should have kept his mouth shut or if the statement issued by the Mansfield Chairman was incorrect and therefore deliberately misleading then he was right to correct it. How is that defensive?
    Also if the view was that Suarez was innocent of calling Evra n***er 10 times then being silent was admitting guilt

    ReplyDelete
  136. Ha ha I know he's such a hero! 2 favourite Arnie films without question (True Lies not far behind). 

    ReplyDelete
  137. A new article every day about someone else's comments on Suarez's handball incident.  Getting kind of redundant I think.

    ReplyDelete
  138. Arsenal v Sheff Utd and Fowler v Arsenal. 

    ReplyDelete
  139. more tosh......jaimie k.... you are so argumentative....wot a twat.

    ReplyDelete
  140. ask paul alcock if he thinks di canio is a shining example!!!!

    ReplyDelete
  141. surely the principal discipline of sport is to play to the whistle. since time immemorial, we have been imploring footballers to do this. indeed, suarez did exactly this in the last game, against sunderland. by staying on his feet in spite of an illegal challenge, he had the opportunity to continue on and score, which he duly did. in the game against mansfield, he once again played to the whistle. so where is the offence?

    ReplyDelete
  142. liverpool are to appeal against the two red cards in next sundays game at old trafford

    ReplyDelete
  143. What has non league oppisition got to do with anything ?

    Your 'zero tolerance' to cheating surely should encompass all cheating by and agaisnt all players and teams regardless of their standing..  ?

    Isn't everybody being treated equally the essence of fair play ? So whether it happens against Man U or Mansfield , it doesn't matter the net result is the same.

    For someone who has 'zero tolerence' to cheating you seem to be able to categorise levels of cheating(i.e a hand ball is worse than a shirt pull) and their levels of unfairness based on the oppisition( especially unfair on non league oppisition)

    You keep flipping and flopping on your stance..

    You've been asked before and I will ask you again..

    Please write an definitive article on your 'zero tolerance' to cheating, detailing exactly your stance on what incidents in modern football constitutes cheating..

    You keep preaching and making grand statements about the state of modern football and the cancer that is cheating , but you've never once categorically nailed your beliefs to the mast.. for fear of contradicting yourself no doubt and for it to become even more apparently clear that this it is a zero tolerence to Suarez at liverpool complex you have ..

    I find it incresingly tiring your ducking and diving (if you'll pardon the pun ;-) ) around this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  144. P.S. I hardly think P di C is a fair play icon !!

    I appreciate your need to validate your argument but using a well known facist and Nazi saluter and a guy that was susspended for striking a referee as a shinning example of a fair play icon 11



    I find it incresingly tiring your ducking and diving (if you'll pardon the pun ;-) ) around this issue.

    ReplyDelete
  145. Of course not. With reference to Van Pvssy. MU have been getting away with murder in the past 20 years. I don't see any MU fan coming out to actually discredit their players "cheating". Let's just get on with it. 
    This BS has become a boring topic actually.

    ReplyDelete
  146. Spot on Nick. I like.

    ReplyDelete
  147. Poor example! Looks like considerable contact to me!!

    ReplyDelete
  148. If you have sinned you must confess. Suarez is a sinner. therefore he must confess. Confessions of a footballer comes to mind.

    ReplyDelete
  149. Of course i dont expect endless arse kissing jamie, i love a good debate like anyone & lfc has done plenty to incur criticism, theres no need to get petulant, i just think an lfc website shoul have a preponderance of positive articles, btw, i dont know any larry,s that are happy :)

    ReplyDelete
  150. This handball business is nonsense.

    It is clearly unintentional. Suarez has created this problem with some of his past behaviour but the response to this goal has been insane.

    The problem is, Suarez does need to mature as a player- he needs to stop play acting (he has made encouraging steps in this direction), continue to argue less with officials and needs to stop the rash tackles he seems to do now and again (like that Distin shocker).

    The problem is, blaming him for things he deserves little to no blame for obscures the issue and does nothing to help him improve. You can't get to the root of the issue if you're blaming him for things he hasn't done. Also when people wrongly take him to task for things like this, it gives the club a (false) license to be defensive when he actually does something wrong.

    Of course, calling the response to the latest Suarez scandal irresponsible supposes that the majority of his critics have any actual moral compass and are interested in anything more than partisan baiting, hating of Johnny-foreigner and chasing another headline.

    That supposition, is my mistake.

    ReplyDelete
  151. Yes, Di Canio is the best proffesional, ha?
    Pushing the referee to the ground is proffesional then.
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=j37sS1u2FR8
    Also, I believe him to be a racist, in addition to him being a declared fascist.
    I remember he was sent off twice for his fascist salutes.
    More info(even if it is VERY biased) about him being racist:
    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=_xpDixwO6mE

    No respect for the person at all(regardless of his unquestionable football skills).

    ReplyDelete
  152. haha well said, suarez is the victim of bullys and racists , that's the problem. fellaini head butts someone could of killed them!! and not a dickie bird from the press and alike.

    ReplyDelete
  153. Mine all get posted zanatos....maybe its just the bad ones that get deleted LOL

    ReplyDelete
  154.  thats why as an idea its a non starter...its a ludicrous suggestion...the game would never end

    ReplyDelete
  155.  Jaimie if you stand back and look at the issue in respect to football its ridiculous...forget about morality and fair play...just think about how it would affect a normal game if everyone was stopping ,apologizing yadayada....its the tip of the iceberg the game as we know it would end ....it would be a stop start snore fest ...football thrives because there are heros and villians ...its an escape of reality to cheer the good guys and boo the villains its panto on a pitch....if it was played how you say ....you would never know me or the people on this forum as footaball would with and die and forums like this would exist

    ReplyDelete
  156. is it knock off

    ReplyDelete
  157. I knew that. Just thought it needed to be clarified out in the open :-)

    ReplyDelete
  158. Totally agree. Yes it was unsporting, yes it would have looked good if he owned up to it, but he didnt, and no player would have. I think you need to get over it Jaimie. Who's opinion are you going to quote next, the cleaner at your son footballs teams aunty Gurtrude?

    ReplyDelete
  159. Di Canio caught a ball, decent thing to do, not an open goal by any means.

    Di Canio has also assaulted a referee, and displayed questionable political leanings in the past on the field of play. An outrageous act!!!

    Can anybody on here please read the rules of football? Accidental handball is NOT an offence.

    If it was accidental handball in this case, then the goal is perfectly legitimate. Simple.

    The persecution of Suarez is ridiculous at this stage.

    I once scored a near identical goal, volleyed a shot at goal, my arm was over my head, defender cannoned it off my arm, dropped to my left foot - I'm left footed - but I thought the whistle would be blown, so nonchalantly opened my body and slotted it in top corner with my right. Referee blew, and gave the goal. I sheepishly ran past an enraged defence for tip off. Referee explained it was accidental...........

    Graham Poll has said most refs would penalise accidental handball that gives a huge advantage with just a free kick, but these refs are making up their own rules.

    Soccer fans are remarkably naiive when it comes to the rules of the game they love.

    ReplyDelete
  160. If it came off his hand accidentally then no offence took place, read the rules.

    Goal is legitimate

    ReplyDelete
  161. Maybe Suarez should borrow Balotelli's T-shirt "Why always me". The poor lads been witch hunted and abused by the corrupt press ever since he graced us with his remarkable genious in Jan 2011.

    Show the young family man some respect, he's been punished enough and done his time.

    Pick on someone else please because I don't like bullies.
    Just saying!!

    ReplyDelete