Luis Suarez

[LAB 1,030]

I'm leaving this topic.

I like psychedelic stuff, but thats enough for me.

Next time someone bites you at the office don't call it an assault. Be a gentleman, give the man your whole arm.

[Fernando 6,590]

Third BITE doesn't mean FIFA should threat him like a criminal and take out his WC credentials. No one is questioning the punishment here, just the kind of punishment.

Yes it does.

Because if you do it a third time it means you will never learn. So you have no choice but to throw the book at him, or some chiellini. ?

[Muzchap 8,966]

The thing is - if he HAD ADMITTED IT and apologised - I think his punishment would have been less.

Not admitting it, threatening to sue FIFA etc is never going to end well

That's why he's a MASSIVE BELL END along with all of his supporters.

Admit you did something wrong, take the punishment like a man and move on...

I mean the video evidence is there - why even deny it?

[Muzchap 8,966]

To honest I don't get this kind of argument. If you think what he did offended Children, then kids should not be allowed to watch football.

So Suarez should be banned from football because parents with kids have a lot of explaining to do?

I guess you don't have kids?

Monkey see, monkey do - is how children are influenced, parenting and education provide a filter for behaviour - along with children finding 'role models'

Suarez did something that was so out of the ordinary for a football match, it's hard for parents to explain (rationally) and to ensure kids don't think this behaviour is acceptable.

Football has worked hard (especially in the UK) to get rid of racism, fighting and bad language - so that the sport millions of children follow can be enjoyed by the whole family - this is a good thing.

I'm sure you can twist my words to suit your agenda - fair play - I always read your posts and try to understand the different angle you take, I like that - it challenges my thoughts and opinions. But, I'm really struggling to understand your perspective on this.

[Pot Noodle 9]

http://www.bbc.co.uk/sport/0/football/28059782

Barcelona still want to sign Suarez

hope they do sell him, good fucking riddance

[iceman 329]

To honest I don't get this kind of argument. If you think what he did offended Children, then kids should not be allowed to watch football.

So Suarez should be banned from football because parents with kids have a lot of explaining to do?

Rooney's son

[Special Juan 28,187]

People are saying this is harsh.....funnily enough, I don't think it's enough.

[Henrique 9,133]

Even Chielini, the victim, is saying the punishment is excessive.

[robsblubot 3,595]

Even Chielini, the victim, is saying the punishment is excessive.

Because it is not an easy one...

One one hand it's a ridiculous thing, he's done before, and he is a role model (yeah right!). If we go that route then many will have to be banned for life (Balotelli).

On the other hand, is Chiellini unable to play? What was the actual long-term effects caused by the sick act. He did not break a leg, or went over the ball to hurt the player: it was something very silly and that's why we have all these jokes over the internet.

He certainly deserves a ban, but I still find it ironic that he gets 4 months, while players who literally and intentionally break the leg/knee/ankle of a colleague get a couple/handful of matches.

[The Skipper 20,609]

He certainly deserves a ban, but I still find it ironic that he gets 4 months, while players who literally and intentionally break the leg/knee/ankle of a colleague get a couple/handful of matches.

Suarez would also normally just get a handful of matches but this is his third offence...

[Dion 2,476]

No, and no. Intentional violent tackle is not what football is about. Take the Aguero/Luiz incident two seasons ago. Thats definitely not what you should expect to see on the pitch. You are basically saying if the agressor using his foot in FOOTball, its more acceptable than using his teeth. I can't accept that. I agree, bitting is totally out of place, but again, I said he deserved the punishment, I'm just saying FIFA just went too far, specially with the 4 month ban, and taking out his WC credentials and treating him like a criminal.

Its not the only problem here. What was the criterion used to punish him? Who punished him? Why 9 games and not 10? Why 4 months and not 3, 5, 6, or even 1 year?

Punishment with no rules to regulate the punitive power is always some kind of authoritarianism.

His football activity ban is totally out of place. FIFA should only ban players from international duties. His aggression happened in a WC. Why he should be banned from club competition? Competitions that FIFA is not involved?

But in the last sentence you said FIFA should obligate Suarez to see some psychiatrist. It seems you love an authoritarianism, just like most part of Brazilians.

Using his foot is also unacceptable. But in the scale of unacceptable things, it is lower than biting. Unless we're talking about kicking someone with no ball involved, then it is about the same. But I was talking about those cases when a players is already doing a sliding tackle, for example, and when he notices he won't reach the ball, he hits the other player "just because". His first motive was legit, but frustration with the game or for not being able to reach the ball with that tackle made him decide to hit the opponent. That's one thing. Most violent plays we see fall into that, tackles, elbowing, you name it. His bitings incidents are totally different. He wasn't challenging for the ball in any of them, they were gratuitous aggressions, totally uncalled for. In addition, he chose to do it in the most bizarre and out of the place way he could find, which makes everything even more shocking. As a law student or lawyer yourself you should know that the means you choose to commit a crime and the circumstances are taken in consideration too. It's not only about potential damage. It also matters whether it is your first incident or your third, fourth... And you also know when someone behaves in a manner one would question his sanity, he should undergo some sort of psychiatric evaluation. It is not authoritarianism, he brought it upon himself. He should be only allowed after being cleared from a psychiatrist in order to protect other players. Who's to know when will he attack again. The part where you question why 9 and not 10, why 4 months and not 6, I agree with. However that is not exclusive to Suarez, that could have been asked in many other cases. Punishment in football seems to be chosen with a heavy dose of subjectivity, unfortunately. I think how they sentenced Suarez was reasonable though. By the way, he IS sort of a criminal for biting people.

[Madmax 9,219]

He certainly deserves a ban, but I still find it ironic that he gets 4 months, while players who literally and intentionally break the leg/knee/ankle of a colleague get a couple/handful of matches.

There is no way anyone can go about establishing intention when it comes to leg-breaking tackles.

[Dion 2,476]

Even Chielini, the victim, is saying the punishment is excessive.

Maybe he was so psychologically damaged by the bite that he's got Stockholm syndrome

[robsblubot 3,595]

There is no way anyone can go about establishing intention when it comes to leg-breaking tackles.

disagree, esp after the match when people can watch video replays with cool heads.

these types of tackles are as intentional as it gets: (replay shows the over-the-ball intention)

http://blog.foxsoccer.com/post/50096207473/kweuke-delivers-brutal-leg-breaking-tackle

Roy Keane, Witsel, Shawcross... yes, it's a moment of madness, but it's still intentional: in that brief moment they want to injure the other player.

[Dion 2,476]

disagree, esp after the match when people can watch video replays with cool heads.

these types of tackles are as intentional as it gets: (replay shows the over-the-ball intention)

http://blog.foxsoccer.com/post/50096207473/kweuke-delivers-brutal-leg-breaking-tackle

Roy Keane, Witsel, Shawcross... yes, it's a moment of madness, but it's still intentional: in that brief moment they want to injure the other player.

I think he meant you can't say the player wanted to break the other player's leg, per say. He wanted to hit him, that's for sure, but how much damage did he expect/intend to do? That's hard to know. Still should be punished, don't get me wrong. If you are taking the risk of breaking someone's leg by yourself you should see heavy punishment, even if what you had in mind was some bruises and scratches.

[lucio 5,418]

disagree, esp after the match when people can watch video replays with cool heads.

these types of tackles are as intentional as it gets: (replay shows the over-the-ball intention)

http://blog.foxsoccer.com/post/50096207473/kweuke-delivers-brutal-leg-breaking-tackle

Roy Keane, Witsel, Shawcross... yes, it's a moment of madness, but it's still intentional: in that brief moment they want to injure the other player.

thats just mindless aggression. not ghoulish behaviour

[Rom2013 446]

disagree, esp after the match when people can watch video replays with cool heads.

these types of tackles are as intentional as it gets: (replay shows the over-the-ball intention)

http://blog.foxsoccer.com/post/50096207473/kweuke-delivers-brutal-leg-breaking-tackle

Roy Keane, Witsel, Shawcross... yes, it's a moment of madness, but it's still intentional: in that brief moment they want to injure the other player.

That's really bad but that's a normal situation in football... anyway I think he will be out for a good time. He had no intention to break the leg of the other player that's a normal reaction.

Figo also destroyed the carreer of the player Cesar Jimenez 10 years ago. Things like this happen:

One thing is a normal moment of the game, other thing is what Pepe did to Casquero, or Keane to Haland, or Suarez for the third time. That's assualt and yes out of a football pitch can be a crime.

[lucio 5,418]

That's really bad but that's a normal situation in football... anyway I think he will be out for a good time. He had no intention to break the leg of the other player that's a normal reaction.

Figo also destroyed the carreer of the player Cesar Jimenez 10 years ago. Things like this happen:

One thing is a normal moment of the game, other thing is what Pepe did to Caquero, or Keane to Haland, or Suarez for the third time. That's assualt and yes out of a football pitch can be a crime.

the recent pepe headbutt on muller? that could technically be an assault. but it was really nothing.

[Rom2013 446]

the recent pepe headbutt on muller? that could technically be an assault. but it was really nothing.

You are joking for sure.

[lucio 5,418]

You are joking for sure.

no. he lent in with his head. no chance of hurting anyone. definite red card. no more. mullers reacton was embarrassing.

now this is a proper pepe assault.