PM clarifies Suarez comments

Prime Minister David Cameron has insisted the 10-match ban given to Liverpool striker Luis Suarez is an FA matter.

Last Updated: 26/04/13 at 09:33 Post Comment

David Cameron: Explained his comments on Suarez's ban

David Cameron: Explained his comments on Suarez's ban

Prime Minister David Cameron insists Luis Suarez's punishment for biting is a matter for the Football Association - and that his own intervention in the matter was merely that of a concerned father.

Liverpool manager Brendan Rodgers reacted angrily to his star striker's 10-match ban for biting Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic, claiming that remarks from both the FA and Cameron had affected the impartiality of the independent panel hearing his case.

The FA stated the standard three-match ban for violent conduct was "clearly insufficient" in Suarez's case when announcing he had been charged on Monday, while Cameron said earlier this week: "I think it would be very understandable if (the panel) took into account the fact that high-profile players are often role models."

The Prime Minister told BBC Radio Five Live on Friday morning: "I made my own views clear just as a dad watching the game.

"I've got a seven-year-old son who just loves watching football and when players behave like this it just sets the most appalling example to young people in our country."

Pressed on whether a 10-match ban was appropriate for the offence, he added: "That's up to the FA, it's not my decision.

"The FA make the decision, they're entirely independent and that is the way it should work.

"I'm going to leave it entirely to the FA. But if you're asking me as a dad and as a human being, do I think we should have tough penalties when players behave like this, yes I think we should.

"There are people, I've read in some newspapers, who think somehow this isn't serious. I think it is serious, when we're trying to bring up our children properly, they do see football players as role models.

"Bringing up children is one of the toughest things we do but you can't wrap them in cotton wool and hide them away from the world, they do see these real-life examples and they repeat them back to you."

Rodgers claimed the comments from the FA and the Prime Minister, among others, had "prejudiced" the decision of the independent panel which handed down the ban.

"We had been given clear indications by the FA that there was going to be an independent - or so-called independent - case put together and then we would receive what that sanction would be," he said.

"If you are an independent panel and yet the day beforehand the FA come out and say he (Suarez) will serve more than three games it is not independent because they are already putting pressure on the sanction.

"There is a prejudice there straight away.

"Everyone has their opinion - which is normal. People will be emotional in their statements - former players of the club and ex-players of other clubs having their opinions - the Prime Minister even chipped in, which is a different matter altogether.

"(Suarez) fell way below the standards set at the club but it doesn't mean he should be thrown to the garbage, which is what has happened with a lot of people in the last few days."

Liverpool have until midday today to confirm whether they intend to appeal the punishment, after studying the panel's written reasons for the suspension.

Rodgers remains confident the latest controversy in Suarez's relatively short spell in England - he has so far been banned for 18 matches in just over 28 months after receiving an eight-game suspension for racially abusing Manchester United's Patrice Evra - will not force him out.

"It is arguable he will have a better season (Suarez has scored 30 goals) than he has had this season yet he has still come under scrutiny and received criticism," he added.

"I don't think it (the ban) was right, it was too severe, and that will make you think, there is no question about that.

"At this moment in time I am sure he will feel really low because of the sanction that has been put on his actions.

"I think it is a 'crime' which we all see at the football club as something that shouldn't have happened.

"We knew he would get the punishment - we just never thought it would be so severe it would put him out of playing until October."


Click here for completely free £10 bet with Sky Bet


Related News

Most Commented

Readers' Comments

I

d like to add players who push their team-mates out of the way to celebrate on their own

exhausted
The Ten Most Hated Things In Football

I

f I were Manuel Pellegrini I would keep quiet and hope the Board didn't notice City not winning anything. If he isn't sacked I'd be astonished.

lfcfan80
Pellegrini: I won't be sacked

S

till I suppose it still gives him at least another year in the job. By the time it comes around , he can always make up another excuse. First it was 3 months , then a year .....Next year ? Whats his excuse with Van Persie ?

spud1
Di Maria 'could peak next year'

Footer 365

Neville 'concerned' over Reds form

Gary Neville has admitted that he is "concerned" that a resurgent Liverpool could qualify for the Champions League ahead of Manchester United.

Boro claim top spot as Derby lose

Middlesbrough became the new Championship leaders as they took advantage of Derby's latest slip by beating Millwall 3-0.

Aston Villa 2-1 West Brom: Benteke's late show helps end Villa's long wait for a win

Tim Sherwood recorded his first win as Aston Villa boss as Christian Benteke's late penalty helped beat West Brom 2-1.

Mail Box

Look Away Now Please, Sherwood...

Sherwood's cringeworthiness, Matic's Wembley celebrations, why LVG must show balls - it's all here in your Wednesday afternoon Mailbox...

United's No 2 Isn't That Bad Either...

One mailboxer is getting in a flap about the claim Man Utd would struggle without De Dea, while there's some anger directed at Chelsea...

© 2015 Sky Ltd. All Rights Reserved A Sky Sports Digital Media company