Lord Duckhunter

And my point is that Saints fans sang songs about BWP and that "incident". Liverpool fans are no different than supporters of every club, one eyed and willing to forgive most things that their players have done. We seem to have forgiven a bit of spot fixing from one of our greats. Yes, the Hillsborough stuff makes the club slightly different, but I'm pretty sure had 96 Saints fans died in one of our 80's semi finals we'd want to get to the bottom of the cover up. Are you seriously trying to say that had Rickie Lambert done the same thing as Suarez (unlikely, but then Defoe did it), our supporters would be any different? No chance, it'll be exactly the same.

Raphael Honigstein's just been on Talksport. He said that Dortmund and Bayern were good sides and Schalke decent, but he said the rest of the league were very poor.

Bit like Saints fans were over BWP?

How difficult is it to grasp the unfairness of one player getting a yellow card and one player getting a 10 game ban, for exactly the same offense. The Defoe case was not considered on it's merits, the FA deemed that biting did not come under their exceptional circumstances rule and therefore the ref's decision stood. Surely you can see the unfairness in that, compared to the exceptional circumstance that led to a 10 game ban, rather than the standard 3. I'm pretty sure people on here would if, it was a Southampton player whose punishment was so much greater than a Spurs player.

Let's look at the facts. Defoe bit someone and Suarez bit someone. Dofoe's bite was seen and he was given a yellow card. The FA decided that it was not an exceptional circumstance and therefore did not "re referee" the game and allowed the punishment to stand. Suarez's bite was not seen by the official, so faced a charge. The standard punishment for violent conduct is 3 games, unless exceptional circumstances. My opinion is that biting is either exceptional or it's not. It cant be exceptional for Suarez but not Defoe.

Do you think Defoe got off lightly by only receiving a yellow card and do you believe that had Suarez been give a yellow card the FA would have left it at that? Why did John Terry get 4 games for racial abuse and Suarez 8?

You cant run a sustainable disciplinary regime without taking previous punishments for the same incident into account. How would we feel is Gaston got a 10 game ban and somebody else gets just a yellow card for exactly the same offense. It is a disgusting thing to do, but it's disgusting when an England player does it as well as a foreigner. I can see Suarez getting extra because of past behaviour, but 10 games is well OTT bearing in mind the precedent the FA set with Defoe.

Joke decision. It's not the easiest thing or the easiest player to defend, but the ban is this length because of who he is, plain and simple. Defoe bites someone and gets a yellow card, Suarez gets 10 games. Now I'm sure the FA will point to the rule that because the ref saw it and acted they could not increase Defoe's punishment. However as Ben Thatcher found out, they can act if they consider the act extreme. Now the normal ban for violent conduct is 3 games, unless the conduct is considered extreme. It seems like Defoe's bite was not extreme enough to up grade the yellow, yet Suarez's was extreme enough for an extra 7 games. That's Defoe the England international as opposed to Suarez the smarmy foreigner. The whole thing stinks.

As a season ticket holder I can look at this from quite a neutral position, as I don't need to get involved in a mad rush. That doesn't make me a "better" supporter, just a guy who can arrange work around football and is lucky enough to be able to afford a season ticket. My take on it is that there has to be a bit of common sense used here. Surely a guy who has been to 10 home games should have the option to buy a ticket before a guy who has been to 1. That said, having lived abroad I know how important it is to get to watch your team whenever you can, and that whenever may only be twice a year. What doesn't feel right to me is the club allowing people to purchase lots of tickets in one go and not taking into account transaction history this season. It cant be that hard to sort out, they do it with away tickets. I'm surprised the club didn't link games this season, they could of linked West Ham, West Brom and Stoke and allowed people to buy those 3 together before they went on general sale. I'm sure there would have been tickets on general sale for all 3, but it would allow the "regulars" to guarantee tickets.

But he's making a fool of himself on this thread.

They have a really good idea, the points system, and then after a whole season where people can build up points, just open up the last game tickets to a mad rush. FFS what a bunch of amateurs. Even if you cant go to every game get a S/T. I missed 4 games and managed to sell it on easily. The more demand there is the more a S/T makes sense, there aint going to be many games you wont be able to sell it on.

Mine came last Sat, and they've now mastered the art of sticking the envelope down. That's 2 game running Reading and now Spurs that there hasn't been a cock up with our away tickets, great work from the ticket office...............

Ashley Coleslaw ,Bacary Lasagne

I've just listened to Week in Westminster and I was so impressed with labour MP Simon Danczuk and his views on welfare. Even I would think about voting labour if there were more like him.

Did anyone hear Jamie Redknapp on Sky going on about Rafa? Souness said he's done quite a good job and Jamie said "I'm not so sure, when he joined they were only 4 points behind Man Utd" He joined Chelsea the same week as Twitchy went to QPR, I bet Jamie wont judge daddy's record the same way.

I wouldn't, but plenty of Saints fans would. What makes you think Liverpool supporters are any different than ours?

Most Saints fans would be the same if Lambert tucked into someone (not that he would).

If Pap continues this nonsense, the mods are going to have to move the thread to The Muppet show.

Your claim was it was "on record" that the bombing was an "FBI plot gone wrong". The link you posted is just more conspiracy nonsense. I suppose it's my fault for taking "on the record" to mean some sort of official enquiry , rather than more pony chucked at American law enforcement.

I'm sure Pap will be posting that Charles Manson was an FBI agent in a minute.

If it's on record I'm sure you wouldn't mind posting the official link. Or is "on record" code for someone's opinion in an article?

You watch too many movies, this is real life not Martin Scorsese's latest block buster. Do you seriously believe that 2 innocent brothers were watching the marathon and then got framed by the FBI. If Just Mike was arrested for being a terriost, I doubt very much that there would be a whole city locked down, I doubt whther grenades would have been thrown, a police officer shot dead and a running gun battle after a car hijacking. If you seriously believe that law enforcement should realise all their evidence to the wider world on day one then you are deluded. I doubt if there's a handful of people in the Western World who think this is a FBI cover up. I think these guys were tracked down and apprehended pretty quickly and I'm sure 99.9% of Bostonians are pleased with the law enforcement agencies quick work. They would have been under incredible pressure and their first priority would have been the safety of ordinary people.

Some Brits are like it as well, but it's ok to celebrate if it's political. There are idiots in America, just as there are idiots in the UK. I lived and worked amongst them for a few years and they are kind generous and ordinary, like most Brits are. Anyone who thinks these brothers were set up is deluded or on a wind up.

Not around the timing they didn't. After Leeds went into admin Minutes after getting relegated the league changed the rules. If you entered admin after a certain date in the season and would have been relegated anyway, the minus 10 rolls over until the following year. We went into admin after the cut off date, would have gone down without it, so it rolled over. The only grey area was around the club/parent company balance, but they deducted Cov -10 so have been consistent there. Nobody has been in the situation regarding not honouring a CVA , until them, so the league imposed special terms (-10). Whether that's too lenient is open to debate, but saying we were made an example of is not.

They didn't make an example of us at all, they followed their clearly laid out rules.