Like Frank Murphy and the GAA.
The English media like to sensationalize stories to make money, the Irish are obsessed with the shit that gets published in the English media
England trying to mask over their embarrassing world cup.
The outrage on social media by Irish Man Utd fans is absolutely hilarious- Imagine being that obsessed- What do they give a fuck what a Uruguayan player did to an Italian player while playing in Brazil?
Emlyn Mulligan is your friend?
[QUOTE=âMark Renton, post: 970446, member: 1796â]England trying to mask over their embarrassing world cup.
The outrage on social media by Irish Man Utd fans is absolutely hilarious- Imagine being that obsessed- What do they give a fuck what a Uruguayan player did to an Italian player while playing in Brazil?[/QUOTE]
I suppose itâs a little bit of craic to antagonise liverpool fans engaging in their cannibal adulation.
if you deliberately do somebody harm then the governing body meets to determine the punishment appropriate to the offence.
If you repeatedly do something, despite lengthy bans for the same offence, like the biter, then the ban has to be more severe each time, because it is evident the thick cunt hasnât learned from it.
6 months - all soccer. Fuck him
[QUOTE=âBandage, post: 970433, member: 9â]If itâs someone I like - no ban;
If itâs someone I dislike - ban.[/QUOTE]
Youâre a simple man sometimes Bandage, its to be commended.
[QUOTE=âEsteban de la Sexface, post: 970452, member: 2695â]if you deliberately do somebody harm then the governing body meets to determine the punishment appropriate to the offence.
If you repeatedly do something, despite lengthy bans for the same offence, like the biter, then the ban has to be more severe each time, because it is evident the thick cunt hasnât learned from it.
6 months - all soccer. Fuck him[/QUOTE]
So you agree, there has to be a scale
Whatever getâs you through the night, mate.
I prefer a world with Luis Suarez to one without. Let the man play.
no, you agree (with yourself) there has to be a scale. All deliberate attempts to badly injure a player are equally wrong, whether it be to break a leg or smash in a face, or take a chunk out of a fella.
So they should all have the same lengths of ban across the board if they are all equally wrong rather than judging each one in context?
So for instances you think that David Beckhamâs kick on Diego Simeone in the 98 World Cup was as equally as bad as Harold Schumackers in 82?
[QUOTE=âchewy louie, post: 970465, member: 1137â]So they should all have the same lengths of ban across the board if they are all equally wrong rather than judging each one in context?
So for instances you think that David Beckhamâs kick on Diego Simeone in the 98 World Cup was as equally as bad as Harold Schumackers in 82?[/QUOTE]
David Beckham didnât break Diego Simeoneâs leg you dope. Your scale was breaking someones leg. Not clipping their ankles. At least be consistent in your stupidity if you are going to persist in being stupid.
How do you decide if they intended to badly injury someone?
it is simple really⌠if the fella they intend to injure is badly injured afterwards.
So Suarez should face no ban then.
So you base the punishment on the outcome as opposed to the incident itself?
taken out of context kid. the deliberate injuries and biting are grouped together a few posts up.
Grand donât ban the cunt. Allow biting to become a part of the game. If a centre back is being mean to you, bite him.
Just donât argue when Sergio Aguero takes a big chunk of Agger next season.
No, I asked what was worse, spitting or biting. you then talked a load of bollocks about it all being the same and that to deliberately do someone harm they shouldm have the same ban across the board. David Beckham deliberately kicked an opponent, as did Schumacker. The intent is the only thing it should be judged on, not the injury suffered.
On your logic would we just leave lads off with throwing headbutts, two footed tackled, elbows and haymakers as long as they didnât make contact, regardless of the intent and excessive force. The rules are all about intent of the incident, not about injury caused by it