FA’s lack of action against Huth is a complete disgrace to the game

I would like to take a moment to comment about the FA since I clearly do not gripe about them enough. In my last post, I said the FA and other governing bodies were not giving referees the tools they need to make accurate calls. This, however, is ridiculous.

In the first 5 minutes of the match against Stoke, Robert Huth stamped on Suarez’s chest, leaving stud marks on the Uruguayan. Obviously, the linesman had a clear view of the incident. Now, we’ve learned that Lee Mason also saw the incident and has stated he chose not to take action. Care to explain yourself Mr. Mason? Under FA rules, Huth cannot be charged with violent conduct.

As far as the FA are concerned, it’s over and done with. Stamping on Suarez is acceptable in this league as is pretty much any other kind of physical or verbal abuse. The purpose of a regulating body is to preserve balance. Right now, the scales are severely warped in everything the FA does. It is extremely frustrating to watch a club go through a rebuilding period with absolutely everything against them. It should not be 11 v 12 every weekend.

So, the FA sucks and we all know it, but what can be done besides endless whining on blogs like this one? I really have no idea, but I am open to suggestions.

-CSD

  • Billious

    Referee Lee Mason should make an urgent appointment with an optician and cease driving until his spectacles are ready, as until then he is a danger to himself and other road users.

  • i think the fa n referees want suares to leave the premier league,that is why they want to frustrate him.

  • Kickusupanddowneveryweek

    I’d love to see liverpool playing In Spanish league

  • Jonathan

    The standard of refeering leaves much to be desired. As for what FA stands for in more senses than one I need not spell it out to you. Suits them to the ground. That such blatancy is allowed and Mason has the cheek to say that he saw it and let it go. Shocking! That should have been a red card.

  • joe

    Frankly, the Stoke game was one sided rugby, but the ManU debacle was an inditement, not just of the FA, but of that strange governing body that rose to defend the referee from mean tweets. Who do the referees work for? What standards apply for competence? And how do you prevent the ManU effect where every game in England is a home game?

  • Nangai Moses

    I think the problem is about Stand Chart Bank being a rival in the same business with Barclays bank is the all cause of the unfair treatment to Liverpool FC. We might have to start another league which will cater for the oppressed ones.
    It has not happened once or twice but many time when we are unfair treated.

    Never walk alone Nangai Moses UG

  • I believe the same, the FA want rid of Suarez, and i would go further, i believe they or certain people within the game want to see Liverpool pay for last seasons debacle. How Stoke finished with 12 men on the park (no thats not a mistake they had 12 men out there) is beyond me, Lee Mason is a disgrace of a referee.
    As for Louis, stop the simulation mate, you are better than that, Saturdays dive was a joke when i saw it in the flesh, on Mod it was even worse. As for Stoke best rugby team in the prem.

  • TomTom

    The Fa stands for Fearful Apes

  • tfc

    i think someone should complain to the police about the assault carried out on suarez in plain sight in front of kids giving the wrong impression on how to play the game

  • GoYaReds

    All we can do now is fight till the end and keep playing good football !!!!
    WE ALL KNOW IT, IT’S US AGAINST THEM !!!!
    As long as this “special” treatment for Suarez and Liverpool in general keep on being applied, the conspiracy theories will only grow and the FA getting more and more attention for there inability to be impartial and taking care of the proper application of football regulations !!
    If they keep on like this, they completely failed in their responsibility !!!!
    Don’t forget the whole world is watching too ……

  • Richard

    It is simple as A B C…. The way I see it 1) Mike Riley is a self confessed Man U fan, he must be happy to know Liverpool is on the down, much of what he tells his official definitely have Ben disfavouring Liverpool. 2) The FA is the biggest culprit here, videos and replays don’t lie, they clearly have seen numerous times incidents involving Suarez. So, have the FA said a word. They sure do; good job refs, continue with that sort of refereeing on Liverpool’s game. The FA clearly wants Suarez out of the PL. 3) Most of the referees whose teams they support were beaten by Liverpool during the reign of Liverpool, so they are out for revenge. 4) Even if Liverpool does sell Suarez, we will not be given the same set of rules all because of point 1 and 3.

  • VIp Patel

    One matter to change would be the FA’s inability to take action if the a ref witnesses an incident, but opts not to act. If an action is particularly egregious, despite whether or not the ref saw it, the FA should have the ability to undermine the ref’s decision. An argument can be made that the refs have to make a decision in a split second without the assistance of tv-replays. That argument however would not work for the FA who would have replays and public opinion to deal with.
    I’m not one to say the FA is out to get Suarez as if they are the “boogyman,” however, I do believe the FA is fearful of making the difficult calls because of public sentiment. If the FA had to ability to second-guess the refs on particularly abhorrent incidents, this controversy would slowly fizzle out.
    What would constitute egregious incidents? Well, stamping on ones chest, or intentional violent act upon another would be on the top of the list. I would not say diving rises to that level because it is not a violent act. There should be some consequences with diving though, albeit, I’d leave it up to the refs.
    …Hope this suggestion is helpful

  • Kaz