Suarez Giving Fulham Fans The Finger

[FatFreddysCat]

Hardly a great ambassador for his once great club now consigned to the also runs. I'm sure many Fulham who didn't have any feelings be it good or bad towards King Kennys failing club now hate them because of Pata. Friends of Fulham not friends of wind up scousers.

[ImperialWhite]

He was sent off for the handball on the line against Ghana, earning himself a one-match suspension but giving his team mates a small but fighting chance. Even in Saturday/Sunday football I would expect whoever is on the line to do the same thing. In fact, would have a massive go if the player on the line didn't do it.

If Gyan lost his nerve in taking that pen... it's his own fault.

So you condone cheating then? By ANY team and any player? Or is it just because this is a Liverpool cheat we are discussing?

I guess then if a player is through on goal, you would sanction the keeper bringing him down, even if it means breaking the players legs and ending his career then? Even if that player was a Liverpool player?

Sorry Pata, I support many views from many people, but I would suggest if you wish to defend cheating Liverpool players, this is not the forum to do it on.

So, you consider physical violence on the pitch "cheating"? This is interesting as it does go somewhat against the grain of traditional British attitudes towards rough play on the pitch, the lionisation of brutality (until very recently), as it's a "man's game". Do you consider, say, the "Chopper" Harrises and Vinny Joneses of this world "cheats"?

To answer your original question, to me a handball on the line to try to save the game in the last minute is OK. Breaking a player's legs is certainly not OK; however, I would point out that it's not necessary to break a player's leg to stop him from scoring. Does every keeper/defender who brings down a player who is through on goal get labelled a "cheat"?

Yes, violence is cheating. Next.

Racially abusing a player is vile. Obviously, although it appears that the YNWA spirit even extends to defending racism.

Deliberate handball is cheating. Easy.

Is an elbow in Suarez's back "cheating"? Is Bobby Zamora leading with an elbow "cheating"? Would fans boo their own for kicking and elbowing Suarez?

I have not defended racism or bigotry anywhere. I did notice that thread with some racist comments was taken down yesterday.

I've never claimed that Fulham players have never cheated; but these things are (or can be) appropriately punished. A deliberate handball in the manner of Suarez changed the outcome of the game entirely and not only this the laws are unable to appropriately deal with. This act of cheating is far far worse for that reason.

Suarez - who denied a near certain goal -  was merely punished with a penalty and a sending off. Penalties are very often missed, especially in high pressure situations. A sending off is near worthless so late in the game.

Ghana were the moral victors in that match.

...

A cheeky little tu quoque there - FOFer(s) [allegedly] saying racist things, so I can hardly go and criticise Suarez can I? Now that you mention it, people from my home town have said some pretty racist/homophobic/ablist things, so I better shut up about those in future too (etc etc).

[RidgeRider]

Please use the IGNORE feature if you find a poster winds you up. End of. Maybe I need to post this daily to remind everyone as many have not actually used the feature. You are not compelled to engage posters just because you don't like what they write. Its your choice.

If you don't engage them, then eventually there won't be much reason for them to post. Simple.

[Pata]

Is an elbow in Suarez's back "cheating"? Is Bobby Zamora leading with an elbow "cheating"? Would fans boo their own for kicking and elbowing Suarez?

I have not defended racism or bigotry anywhere. I did notice that thread with some racist comments was taken down yesterday.

I've never claimed that Fulham players have never cheated; but these things are (or can be) appropriately punished. A deliberate handball in the manner of Suarez changed the outcome of the game entirely and not only this the laws are unable to appropriately deal with. This act of cheating is far far worse for that reason.

Suarez - who denied a near certain goal -  was merely punished with a penalty and a sending off. Penalties are very often missed, especially in high pressure situations. A sending off is near worthless so late in the game.

Ghana were the moral victors in that match.

...

A cheeky little tu quoque there - FOFer(s) [allegedly] saying racist things, so I can hardly go and criticise Suarez can I? Now that you mention it, people from my home town have said some pretty racist/homophobic/ablist things, so I better shut up about those in future too (etc etc).

Well, that's the thing, these things don't always get (appropriately) punished. Defenders still get away with a lot. There is a reaction. Would you really leave you foot planted when there is a defender thundering in? Do you take the full force of the kick or do you prepare and flick your leg away as soon as it's touched?

Back to the (now tiresome issue) of the handball on the line. It can also be argued that the laws deal with it adequately w/o becoming unpracticably cumbersome. The fact that Ghana bottled it makes them no victors, moral or otherwise.

And, racism. What you say about Suarez is based on hearsay and speculation. You are not in full possession of the facts and neither am I. Re: comments in the thread yesterday. There were there, quite explicit, for all to read. I did not see you jump up screaming "racist".

[FatFreddysCat]

Please use the IGNORE feature if you find a poster winds you up. End of. Maybe I need to post this daily to remind everyone as many have not actually used the feature. You are not compelled to engage posters just because you don't like what they write. Its your choice.

If you don't engage them, then eventually there won't be much reason for them to post. Simple.

But why should we have to ignore him? He reckons he's only defending his club (cant we defend ours on OUR Forum?), but he's cute, he knows he's winding us up, but never says anything to get banned. His comment on the away support at the Emirates was defininately a sly dig. Surely the Mods can see he's upsetting people, Finny is staying away, Mr Raver is considering the same. Why should they go and not the WUM?

[FatFreddysCat]

Is an elbow in Suarez's back "cheating"? Is Bobby Zamora leading with an elbow "cheating"? Would fans boo their own for kicking and elbowing Suarez?

I have not defended racism or bigotry anywhere. I did notice that thread with some racist comments was taken down yesterday.

I've never claimed that Fulham players have never cheated; but these things are (or can be) appropriately punished. A deliberate handball in the manner of Suarez changed the outcome of the game entirely and not only this the laws are unable to appropriately deal with. This act of cheating is far far worse for that reason.

Suarez - who denied a near certain goal -  was merely punished with a penalty and a sending off. Penalties are very often missed, especially in high pressure situations. A sending off is near worthless so late in the game.

Ghana were the moral victors in that match.

...

A cheeky little tu quoque there - FOFer(s) [allegedly] saying racist things, so I can hardly go and criticise Suarez can I? Now that you mention it, people from my home town have said some pretty racist/homophobic/ablist things, so I better shut up about those in future too (etc etc).

Well, that's the thing, these things don't always get (appropriately) punished. Defenders still get away with a lot. There is a reaction. Would you really leave you foot planted when there is a defender thundering in? Do you take the full force of the kick or do you prepare and flick your leg away as soon as it's touched?

Back to the (now tiresome issue) of the handball on the line. It can also be argued that the laws deal with it adequately w/o becoming unpracticably cumbersome. The fact that Ghana bottled it makes them no victors, moral or otherwise.

And, racism. What you say about Suarez is based on hearsay and speculation. You are not in full possession of the facts and neither am I. Re: comments in the thread yesterday. There were there, quite explicit, for all to read. I did not see you jump up screaming "racist".

If it's tiresome, why not hop over to one of your forums? Discuss the greatest club in the World with other likeminded delusional people from Devon?

[ImperialWhite]

Back to the (now tiresome issue) of the handball on the line. It can also be argued that the laws deal with it adequately w/o becoming unpracticably cumbersome. The fact that Ghana bottled it makes them no victors, moral or otherwise.

It could be argued that (Christ, third person weasel words wind me up - who is "it"? You mean "I would argue that") but it would be a poor argument.

A dead cert for a goal and penalty are not even close to being comparable.

An appropriate punishment would be a gifted goal, at the ref's discretion*.

*Another example that springs to mind is Paul Scholes against us a few seasons ago. What if Danny had missed the pen? A clear goal would have been denied to us by cheating. I concede that the absence of outrage over Schole's cheating is telling. However, there should have been outrage about both acts of cheating, not neither.

[RidgeRider]

Please use the IGNORE feature if you find a poster winds you up. End of. Maybe I need to post this daily to remind everyone as many have not actually used the feature. You are not compelled to engage posters just because you don't like what they write. Its your choice.

If you don't engage them, then eventually there won't be much reason for them to post. Simple.

But why should we have to ignore him? He reckons he's only defending his club (cant we defend ours on OUR Forum?), but he's cute, he knows he's winding us up, but never says anything to get banned. His comment on the away support at the Emirates was defininately a sly dig. Surely the Mods can see he's upsetting people, Finny is staying away, Mr Raver is considering the same. Why should they go and not the WUM?

People can and do defend Fulham. Our motto, and the rules reflect this, is to respect the other posters, meaning we try not to demean them for any reason. Engage and argue but do not get personal. If you guys don't like what a poster says, and you can't help yourself, then IGNORE him, either by using the feature this site provides you or just skip over their post. The less you engage them, the less they will post and the happier some of you will be.

We would not be very good Mods if we just eliminated people because we don't like them. We have some posters on here that are Fulham fans but are not popular with some because of their style  or attitude and they wind up other Fulham fans.

We have something on the order of 1000 registered posters. 1 is a Liverpool supporter for example.

We understand some don't appreciate certain posters but many on here do just ignore those they don't appreciate and it seems to work for them. Give it try.

[epsomraver]

Please use the IGNORE feature if you find a poster winds you up. End of. Maybe I need to post this daily to remind everyone as many have not actually used the feature. You are not compelled to engage posters just because you don't like what they write. Its your choice.

If you don't engage them, then eventually there won't be much reason for them to post. Simple.

But why should we have to ignore him? He reckons he's only defending his club (cant we defend ours on OUR Forum?), but he's cute, he knows he's winding us up, but never says anything to get banned. His comment on the away support at the Emirates was defininately a sly dig. Surely the Mods can see he's upsetting people, Finny is staying away, Mr Raver is considering the same. Why should they go and not the WUM?

People can and do defend Fulham. Our motto, and the rules reflect this, is to respect the other posters, meaning we try not to demean them for any reason. Engage and argue but do not get personal. If you guys don't like what a poster says, and you can't help yourself, then IGNORE him, either by using the feature this site provides you or just skip over their post. The less you engage them, the less they will post and the happier some of you will be.

We would not be very good Mods if we just eliminated people because we don't like them. We have some posters on here that are Fulham fans but are not popular with some because of their style  or attitude and they wind up other Fulham fans.

We have something on the order of 1000 registered posters. 1 is a Liverpool supporter for example.

We understand some don't appreciate certain posters but many on here do just ignore those they don't appreciate and it seems to work for them. Give it try.

Jack I think the point you are missing is this is a FULHAM site, friends of, not some wind up scouser who only comes on around when we play them and talks about HIS TEAM!!!

[Pata]

Back to the (now tiresome issue) of the handball on the line. It can also be argued that the laws deal with it adequately w/o becoming unpracticably cumbersome. The fact that Ghana bottled it makes them no victors, moral or otherwise.

It could be argued that (Christ, third person weasel words wind me up - who is "it"? You mean "I would argue that") but it would be a poor argument.

A dead cert for a goal and penalty are not even close to being comparable.

An appropriate punishment would be a gifted goal, at the ref's discretion*.

*Another example that springs to mind is Paul Scholes against us a few seasons ago. What if Danny had missed the pen? A clear goal would have been denied to us by cheating. I concede that the absence of outrage over Schole's cheating is telling. However, there should have been outrage about both acts of cheating, not neither.

There are enough arguments about the referees' interpretation of the Laws of the Game as it is. If referees' would have the powers to award goals (granted, they do that in rugby in the case of penalty tries), I think we'll have a scandal upon a scandal. Does he award it for every handball on the line? What about strikers rounding goalkeepers? Would it be in a particular segment of the match? Would it be the 4th referee? And so on.

Suarez knew what the punishment would be and the pros outweighed the cons. Under the circumstances, I believe he did the right thing. You don't. (impasse)

[Pata]

some wind up scouser who only comes on around when we play them and talks about HIS TEAM!!!

This is factually incorrect.

[jarv]

I seem to recall Rodney Marsh was decent at diving. Must have  learnt it up the road at Shepherds Bush.

[Jimpav]

Back to the (now tiresome issue) of the handball on the line. It can also be argued that the laws deal with it adequately w/o becoming unpracticably cumbersome. The fact that Ghana bottled it makes them no victors, moral or otherwise.

It could be argued that (Christ, third person weasel words wind me up - who is "it"? You mean "I would argue that") but it would be a poor argument.

A dead cert for a goal and penalty are not even close to being comparable.

An appropriate punishment would be a gifted goal, at the ref's discretion*.

*Another example that springs to mind is Paul Scholes against us a few seasons ago. What if Danny had missed the pen? A clear goal would have been denied to us by cheating. I concede that the absence of outrage over Schole's cheating is telling. However, there should have been outrage about both acts of cheating, not neither.

Suarez knew what the punishment would be and the pros outweighed the cons. Under the circumstances, I believe he did the right thing. You don't. (impasse)

Out of interest would you feel he did the right thing had it have been Russia playing instead of Ghana?

[Pata]

Out of interest would you feel he did the right thing had it have been Russia playing instead of Ghana?

Yes. My ire would've been directed at the player missing the penalty.

[ClarksOriginal]

Out of interest would you feel he did the right thing had it have been Russia playing instead of Ghana?

Yes. My ire would've been directed at the player missing the penalty.

In Russia, penalty takes you.

[Jimpav]

Out of interest would you feel he did the right thing had it have been Russia playing instead of Ghana?

Yes. My ire would've been directed at the player missing the penalty.

Typical Liverpool fan  :hook: