Quote:
Originally Posted by TheDaddy
you do understand than Liverpool are his employers and not the fa don't you, his employers have decided on the disciplinary action they feel appropriate, all the fa have done is show how inconsistent they are by banning some one for ten games when in the past they've allowed some one to escape unpunished for committing the same offence, so no he didn't get of lightly at all.
|
Yes he did. Just agree to disagree because I do not at all agree that he did not get off lightly.
I can repeat until I am blue in the face that had this been ordinary Joe public, they would have been sacked and arrested and charged for GHB and then had a nice criminal record to boot.
Last time I checked, it is a criminal offense to assault, cause harm, strike another person, I am pretty much sure 'biting someone' fits these categories.
Also, I am fully aware of his employment arrangements. It matters not who his employers are. The FA is the Governing body of every Football Club in the Country, it is completely irrelevant that the FA are not his employers, they lay the laws of the game down and every club, no matter how big or small they are, has a duty to comply with said laws and if a player breaches those laws of the game regarding serious conduct, in which case this most definately is, then it is the duty of the FA to hand out sanctions to any player who does not comply.
It's absolutely obvious that Liverpool FC are not going to sack/punish their so called star player. So guess what? That's down to the governing body. That would be the FA, his 10 match ban was however, in this case decided by an independent regulatory commission, not the FA, the FA only felt that a standard 3 match ban was an insufficient punishment.