The mancityfans.net football forum

If you were Scouse officialdom, would you appeal in the light of the FA report on the incident? There is a growing feeling that they should just take their medicine and get on with it. Presumably the ban could be increased on appeal and there isn't much sympathy for their cause, so it is a real possibility.
That being the case, when would you announce that you were not appealing? If he plays, tonight which he presumably will, would you take the ban from then? the next eight games would include two Carling Cup games, a home FA cup game v Oldham and presumably a 4th round tie. In other words only four league games. And those four league games would be Bolton, Stoke, Wolves and Spurs. I would suggest that would not be too bad a group of games to miss. Only other factor in that, is that his first game back would be at The Sty against filth. Hmmmm.
If they took it right now, Suarez would be back for their home match with Spurs.
Oh and the Bin Dipping Derby is the next game after Filth.
So a) would you appeal
and b) When would you take the ban?

I think Liverpool will eventually decide not to appeal - probably announcing it on Thursday or Friday of this week. Therefore he would miss from Oldham game on Friday and make his comeback at Old Trafford.

Any appeal would be very foolish for them as it would tarnish Liverpool further and Suarez's ban would probably be extended imo to about 12 games. So by the time he actually started it, it would be the last third of the season and he'd probably be done till next season.

Mark Garrett wrote:I think Liverpool will eventually decide not to appeal - probably announcing it on Thursday or Friday of this week. Therefore he would miss from Oldham game on Friday and make his comeback at Old Trafford.

Any appeal would be very foolish for them as it would tarnish Liverpool further and Suarez's ban would probably be extended imo to about 12 games. So by the time he actually started it, it would be the last third of the season and he'd probably be done till next season.

I think I agree with you there. It would be nice to have him not playing against us in the semi final games. And I'd like him to be back for the Swamp. They are a better side with him than without him.
I did wonder if they would prioritise their Spurs home game over tonight's do with us.

Piccsnumberoneblue wrote:

Mark Garrett wrote:I think Liverpool will eventually decide not to appeal - probably announcing it on Thursday or Friday of this week. Therefore he would miss from Oldham game on Friday and make his comeback at Old Trafford.

Any appeal would be very foolish for them as it would tarnish Liverpool further and Suarez's ban would probably be extended imo to about 12 games. So by the time he actually started it, it would be the last third of the season and he'd probably be done till next season.

I think I agree with you there. It would be nice to have him not playing against us in the semi final games. And I'd like him to be back for the Swamp. They are a better side with him than without him.
I did wonder if they would prioritise their Spurs home game over tonight's do with us.

If I was Dalgliesh I would be looking to capitalise on Citys stuttering form and play my best player, if they beat us tonight then it would be a welcome morale boost before the CC.

Id reckon Mark is right, as if they announce they accept and wont appeal AFTER tonights game, assuming they get past Oldham on saturday, 4 of the next 8 games and thus his ban will be in the Cups and it would allow him to play at Old Trafford.

Goaters 103 wrote:Id reckon Mark is right, as if they announce they accept and wont appeal AFTER tonights game, assuming they get past Oldham on saturday, 4 of the next 8 games and thus his ban will be in the Cups and it would allow him to play at Old Trafford.

I bloody said that first yer bastard!!

Piccsnumberoneblue wrote:

Goaters 103 wrote:Id reckon Mark is right, as if they announce they accept and wont appeal AFTER tonights game, assuming they get past Oldham on saturday, 4 of the next 8 games and thus his ban will be in the Cups and it would allow him to play at Old Trafford.

I bloody said that first yer bastard!!

That you did! I agree with Mark and Piccs - god Im sounding like Gordon friggin Brown.

If I was in Liverpools shoe I'd appeal el pronto. Having read the report a couple of times now it appears to me that the FA have taken everything Evra has said (despite changing his story on the words used) and ignored alot of the Suarez testimony because .... he changed his story after seeing the video stuff. Liverpool testimony's vary slightly (which is natural in cases like this) whereas the Manu ones are exactly the same which appears to me to be colusion amongst them ... don't get me wrong Suarez is guilty to a degree but not with the evidence they seem to have wanted to hang him with. Evra is a lucky fella down grading the wording on what he claims he heard, that should have raised suspicion in the first place in my book.

Chinners wrote:If I was in Liverpools shoe I'd appeal el pronto. Having read the report a couple of times now it appears to me that the FA have taken everything Evra has said (despite changing his story on the words used) and ignored alot of the Suarez testimony because .... he changed his story after seeing the video stuff. Liverpool testimony's vary slightly (which is natural in cases like this) whereas the Manu ones are exactly the same which appears to me to be colusion amongst them ... don't get me wrong Suarez is guilty to a degree but not with the evidence they seem to have wanted to hang him with. Evra is a lucky fella down grading the wording on what he claims he heard, that should have raised suspicion in the first place in my book.

But taking into account the general mood, do you think it is wise to appeal. The FA can come down tough and have the general media on their side.

Probably not wise as you say but it depends on the principal of a fair hearing in my mind, one that does not appear to have happenend in this case. The media seem to be highlighting the Suarez bits as well whilst totally ignoring the Evra bits, they have no evidence that either Suarez or Evra is right, simply none so they instead set about establishing which is the more credible witness.
Evra has many inconsistencies, including most notably: he starts by saying he'd been called a n**ger, he first says its 10 times, then 5, then unbelievably the commission decide it's 7 and ban Suarez on that basis. His team mates don't remember the exact words he used when he told them, but they all say they think it's blah blah blah - with blah equalling exactly the same thing. Well coached, you could say. Giggs actually thought during the game that he was talking about Kuyt, not Suarez. Evra can't recall Suarez pinching his skin at all until shown the evidence. His report on what Suarez said was a phrase that simply isn't used in Uraguay. It is used in Spanish, so the commission decided that Suarez has started to be influenced by living in Europe rather than the rather more obvious option of simply believing that Evra didn't hear it right. (That's given credence because "because you are black" is also the interpretation given by Commolli - also a french man interpreting south american spanish).

I must admit I wouldn't be happy to see one of our players condemned on the word of Evra.
One horrible little shit saying the other horrible little shit. . . . .. is a horrible little shit.
There is a satisfyingly delicious irony to it.

The thing is, after their stance in this issue how can they not appeal?

Beefymcfc wrote:The thing is, after their stance in this issue how can they not appeal?

They can take the victim stance.
"The big bad FA have got it in for us so we can't appeal for fear of an increased ban"
The scousers will lap it up.

The bloke is guilty. He used the wrong defence thinking he would get away with it & has then tried to lie his way out of it when he relised we're not quite as institutionally racist over here as some have suggested.

As long as he gets dogs abuse tonight, I'm happy. I even want to see the kids in the family stand throwing their Hot-Dogs and Wine Gums at him, half chewed of course.

Ted Hughes wrote:The bloke is guilty. He used the wrong defence thinking he would get away with it & has then tried to lie his way out of it when he relised we're not quite as institutionally racist over here as some have suggested.

Thats the bizzare thing Ted, the FA and even the devious lying cunt with form that is Evra don't think he is racist .... its a weird case that if it actually went to court I reckon would get thrown out because of lack of evidence (on both sides) ... still, lets boo him tonight anyway because he is also a devious lying cunt as Piccs put so well in his last post

Chinners wrote:

Ted Hughes wrote:The bloke is guilty. He used the wrong defence thinking he would get away with it & has then tried to lie his way out of it when he relised we're not quite as institutionally racist over here as some have suggested.

Thats the bizzare thing Ted, the FA and even the devious lying cunt with form that is Evra don't think he is racist .... its a weird case that if it actually went to court I reckon would get thrown out because of lack of evidence (on both sides) ... still, lets boo him tonight anyway because he is also a devious lying cunt as Piccs put so well in his last post

I think they've bottled it by not calling him racist, they're worried about the ability to prove stuff in a law court so have played safe. It's the same as City with Tevez; we've found him guilty of misconduct, the 1st charge of which is failing to take part in a match, but publically we have allowed him to claim he's guilty of 'not warming up' because we don't fancy going through the problems of a court case.

Imo, I recon the FA had told Suarez they had some evidence, part of which was video evidence but he didn't know what it was. If he was innoccent, he just says "stick your evidence up your fucking arse, I'm not guilty, see you at the hearing & then I'll see you in a libel court" but because he's as guilty as hell, he doesn't know if they've got him on video, with sound, shouting racist shit at Evra, so he gets his mate Poyet to start playing the 'misunderstanding' card, exactly as Kia Twatian did with Tevez.

Racist, cheating, slimeball.

Personally I'm very upset with Bellamay calling Krull a Dutch cunt. That racist sheep shagging bastard should get at least an 8 game ban too!

mr_nool wrote:Personally I'm very upset with Bellamay calling Krull a Dutch cunt. That racist sheep shagging bastard should get at least an 8 game ban too!

You're not a race, you're a country. The jocks sometimes try it on with the same kind of self importance.

Ted Hughes wrote:

mr_nool wrote:Personally I'm very upset with Bellamay calling Krull a Dutch cunt. That racist sheep shagging bastard should get at least an 8 game ban too!

You're not a race, you're a country. The jocks sometimes try it on with the same kind of self importance.

Guess it all depends on how you define race and a "people" (the Dutch). That's a moot discussion, though, since I was joking (which I thought was quite obvious). By the way, I'm not Dutch in any sense of the word.