How to solve a problem like Suarez?

First topic message reminder :

Suarez for the third time in his career bit another footballer during a match.
The first for Ajax in 2010 when he bit a PSV player (Bakkal) on the shoulder and received a 7 game ban.
The second for Liverpool v Chelsea in 2013 on Ivanovic for which he received a 10 game ban.
And now on the grandest stage of all he's sunk his fangs into Chiellini.

What though should his punishment be?

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Lowlandbrit wrote:Hypothetically; if the ref had seen it and sent him off, how long would he have been suspended for? I wonder if the outcry would have been any different if he'd been sent off, or if Uruguay had lost.

Well Song intentionally elbowed a player in the back and got a 1 match suspension due to a red card which fifa increased to 3.

Song's elbow is far more dangerous than suarez's bite and yet suarez gets a lot bigger suspension.

Nope, this is more dangerous, if Saurez had some disease he could have easily passed that virus onto another player for no mistake of the opponent. Biting is completely uncivilized behaviour and needs a bigger ban than just 4 months, considering this is his third attempt he needs a life ban, no more sympathy.


I read the below lines in Twitter

"This cannibal should be slapped with a lifetime ban. His team mates should book seperate flights home in case the plane goes down in the mountains. Imagine a crash and you're sitting beside a guy who likes to snack on human flesh. At least feed the man before the game."

DirectView2 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Lowlandbrit wrote:Hypothetically; if the ref had seen it and sent him off, how long would he have been suspended for? I wonder if the outcry would have been any different if he'd been sent off, or if Uruguay had lost.

Well Song intentionally elbowed a player in the back and got a 1 match suspension due to a red card which fifa increased to 3.

Song's elbow is far more dangerous than suarez's bite and yet suarez gets a lot bigger suspension.

Nope, this is more dangerous, if Saurez had some disease he could have easily passed that virus onto another player for no mistake of the opponent. Biting is completely uncivilized behaviour and needs a bigger ban than just 4 months, considering this is his third attempt he needs a life ban, no more sympathy.


I read the below lines in Twitter

"This cannibal should be slapped with a lifetime ban. His team mates should book seperate flights home in case the plane goes down in the mountains. Imagine a crash and you're sitting beside a guy who likes to snack on human flesh. At least feed the man before the game."

Stop changing history, Suarez never had any diseases, never spread any diseases and he never penetrated the skin so that blood escaped.

If I want to change history I could say that pepe's headbutt was more dangerous because it could have caused brain damage....

DirectView2 wrote:

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Lowlandbrit wrote:Hypothetically; if the ref had seen it and sent him off, how long would he have been suspended for? I wonder if the outcry would have been any different if he'd been sent off, or if Uruguay had lost.

Well Song intentionally elbowed a player in the back and got a 1 match suspension due to a red card which fifa increased to 3.

Song's elbow is far more dangerous than suarez's bite and yet suarez gets a lot bigger suspension.

Nope, this is more dangerous, if Saurez had some disease he could have easily passed that virus onto another player for no mistake of the opponent. Biting is completely uncivilized behaviour and needs a bigger ban than just 4 months, considering this is his third attempt he needs a life ban, no more sympathy.


I read the below lines in Twitter

"This cannibal should be slapped with a lifetime ban. His team mates should book seperate flights home in case the plane goes down in the mountains. Imagine a crash and you're sitting beside a guy who likes to snack on human flesh. At least feed the man before the game."

He doesn't even need to have a disease to pass on a possible infection.

Where does spitting at a player come then? Doesn't cause any physical damage like a bone breaking tackle. Yes you can say that the tackle causes more harm, but biting and spitting has no place whatsoever in the sport. He may not have harmed anyone but it's still a despicable act.

TwisT wrote:Where does spitting at a player come then? Doesn't cause any physical damage like a bone breaking tackle. Yes you can say that the tackle causes more harm, but biting and spitting has no place whatsoever in the sport. He may not have harmed anyone but it's still a despicable act.

no one said it wasn't.

The problem isn't just what he did, it's the fact he's done it THREE times and shown no remorse about it at any time.

There is a big chance he's going to do it again and people will still want him let off.

Ridiculous and I hope the first tackle he takes next year puts him out for the season

Derbymanc wrote:The problem isn't just what he did, it's the fact he's done it THREE times and shown no remorse about it at any time.

There is a big chance he's going to do it again and people will still want him let off.

Ridiculous and I hope the first tackle he takes next year puts him out for the season

ok so Pepe has been banned countless times for dangerous behaviour on and off the ball, should he also be banned for life or banned for longer than 4 months as he has committed dangerous tackles on more than 3 occasions including headbutts, stamping on players backs as they lie on the floor, kicking players, stamping on players hands as they are on the floor, elbowing players, grabbing players throats, two footed jumping tackles that are intentionally aimed at hurting the other player and punching players in the face amongst other things ?

Biting is just considered more taboo.

A two footed tackle with bad intentions is far more dangerous.

In the rugby world biting, eye gouging and spitting are some of the worst thing you can do.

Punching, stamping (not on head) head butting isn't accepted but no one will hold it against you after the game, biting is looked upon as the most cowardly of acts and shows a complete lack of respect to your opponent and the game itself.

I'd have banned him for longer and will say that biting and spitting are such vile things to do that the danger aspect doesn't come into it. I can understand an elbow or a headbutt but a bite, beggars belief why anybody would feel the need to do it at all let alone on a football pitch three separate times.

Scrumpy wrote:In the rugby world biting, eye gouging and spitting are some of the worst thing you can do.

Punching, stamping (not on head) head butting isn't accepted but no one will hold it against you after the game, biting is looked upon as the most cowardly of acts and shows a complete lack of respect to your opponent and the game itself.

i thought feigning injury was the worst thing in rugby, remember that player who took blood tablets to make it look like he was bleeding to feign injury.

No that was fine.

They just got caught!

I don't know how I feel about the ban. A bit fed up of seeing Liverpool supporters trying to defend the runt though.

DP wrote:I don't know how I feel about the ban. A bit fed up of seeing Liverpool supporters trying to defend the runt though.

Put into perspective Mauro Tasotti intentionally elbowed Luis Enrique in the face at the 94 world cup and broke Enrique's nose and Fifa handed him an 8 match ban.

Zidane was handed a 3 match ban for an intentional headbutt against materazzi in the WC final in 06.

Luis suarez bit a player and caused no damage and has been banned for 25 games and fined £65k

Its repeat offending though.

Seems as though Suarez has had to take out a second mortgage to pay that fine.

#prayforluis

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Its repeat offending though.

if it is purely abou repeat offences and not about the seriousness of it why did fifa not ban Pepe for longer after his off the field 'headbutt'? Pepe has in his career been so dirty.

He can't complain. Ban is fair in my eyes although not on LFC but then we know what he's like. He needs to learn and despite his comments afterwards he knows full well what he's done here - his post match demeanour was pretty tell-tale.

As for Liverpool fans defending him I haven't seen one - if there are any it's ludicrous but if you are one of those 'should of got life or sent to prison' then you're every bit as senseless. But then as football fans we are all hypocrites anyway.

Best to move on now and enjoy what has otherwise been a great WC.

If he gets a ban (and I think he should get at least a year from all football) he should only be allowed to play wearing a mask like Hannibal Lecter. They make dangerous dogs wear a muzzle in public and that's before they've bitten anyone. How long was Tyson banned for chomping on Holyfield's ear? I think it was a year.

rapidringsroad wrote:  If he gets a ban (and I think he should get at least a year from all football) he should only be allowed to play wearing a mask like Hannibal Lecter. They make dangerous dogs wear a muzzle in public and that's before they've bitten anyone. .

Liverbnz wrote: if you are one of those 'should of got life or sent to prison' then you're every bit as senseless

 

Superfly

Excellent comment - it's not the seriousness of the outcome that makes us so repulsed at what Suarez has done, but that it is so far beyond what is considered acceptable behaviour in any context. Biting can potentially be serious, because of the risk of infection, but 99% of the time it is less dangerous for a footballer than would be a lunging studs-up tackle. Yet the tackle is reasonable within the context of the game (well, other than Keane on Haarland a few years ago where he went in with the sole intention of causing significant injury), and so only merits the red card and 1 to 3 game ban. Biting on the other hand is so far outside the context of the sport, indeed any sport, as to merit far more serious sanctions regardless of the outcome.

Just for comparison, there have been a few biting incidents in rugby, which (as one-off offences) have led to suspensions of between 6 months and 80 weeks. Suarez should consider himself lucky that the football authorities are more lenient than this.

Umaga didn't receive any punishment for his spear tackle on O'driscoll did he?

Which in itself highlights the difference in perception between foul play and what we could call as behaviour beyond the pale.

dummy_half wrote:Superfly

Excellent comment - it's not the seriousness of the outcome that makes us so repulsed at what Suarez has done, but that it is so far beyond what is considered acceptable behaviour in any context. Biting can potentially be serious, because of the risk of infection, but 99% of the time it is less dangerous for a footballer than would be a lunging studs-up tackle. Yet the tackle is reasonable within the context of the game (well, other than Keane on Haarland a few years ago where he went in with the sole intention of causing significant injury), and so only merits the red card and 1 to 3 game ban. Biting on the other hand is so far outside the context of the sport, indeed any sport, as to merit far more serious sanctions regardless of the outcome.

Just for comparison, there have been a few biting incidents in rugby, which (as one-off offences) have led to suspensions of between 6 months and 80 weeks. Suarez should consider himself lucky that the football authorities are more lenient than this.

Alex Song was only given a 3 game ban for elbowing a player, is that reasonable as it is within the context of the game?

Well whoever voted for the opening 2 options deserves a slap.

NickisBHAFC wrote:Well whoever voted for the opening 2 options deserves a slap.

I agree but also the 11 people who voted for him to be banned permanently from football need a slap as well

Hmmm i wouldn't agree with it personally, but i can see why people would vote for that.

SecretFly wrote:I don't didn't say ban for life.  But I do say it should be on the card if he does it again.  Yep, I categorically say that.  He's had his chances.

Again, it's your opinion that a bite isn't serious, Champagne.  It's mine and many other people's opinion that it is.  That's why it is such a newworthy incident - human beings react to certain things.  

Like I also said before, Tyson - a boxer who had a lethal and killer instinct for finding the most vulnerable points on a human body and repeatedly attacking them not just to win a fight but to seriously injure.  He admitted it, his intention when fighting was to seriously injure his opponent - but in a sense people accepted his reasoning because boxing is a sport that is all about the fight - it's expected that a fighter will go for jaws and ribs etc and want to hurt.

And yet, even in this brutal world of boxing, what did boxing fans most respond to with disgust?  His ear bite.  A bite.  Men who know all about blood and broken bones and even brain damage, and heavy head hits, and dangerous jaw snaps... but Tyson shamed himself because of a bite.
A bite rates in human terms as low and dirty and underhand and cowardly.  A bite rates because that's our instincts as humanbeings and especially when it drifts into sport.
Broken bones are part of team field sports, in football as much as rugby.  Yes, serious intent demands serious punishment but all players expect the kinds of dangers they face on a football field, and on a rugby field and in a boxing ring.  Very very few of them seem to accept that biting should be part of the usual list of usual offences committed.

I am in broad agreement with what you say, Fly, and you make a valid argument when it comes to the repeat nature of the offence. I think the vast majority of us agree that Luis has an issue that needs addressing. I personally also agree that his recidivism requires increased level of punishment insofar as that is how legal processes are constructed. He is clearly not learning so FIFA have to hit him with a bigger stick. But I stick to my point about proportionality. In the words of the immortal bard (I know it's a bit spoddy of me, but I do love a bit of Shakespeare):

If little faults, proceeding on distemper,
Shall not be wink'd at, how shall we stretch our eye
When capital crimes, chew'd, swallow'd and digested,
Appear before us

OK... moving on. So, if a ban for X number of matches doesn't work, then is it really likely that a lengthier ban will..? I doubt it. And if banning him doesn't teach him the lesson, then obviously it isn't working.

He needs to be punished. That's a given. But he also needs help of a more professional nature than just hitting him with a lengthy ban will achieve. We want him to come back again and entertain us with his undoubted skill, but we can't tolerate this behaviour indefinitely. I hope he will use his four months away from all football related activities to get his head sorted out and that may require the services of a psychiatrist. And a good one, at that. Justice tempered with compassionate care and support.

Then we can all get back to the football.

Champagne_Socialist wrote:

Derbymanc wrote:The problem isn't just what he did, it's the fact he's done it THREE times and shown no remorse about it at any time.

There is a big chance he's going to do it again and people will still want him let off.

Ridiculous and I hope the first tackle he takes next year puts him out for the season

ok so Pepe has been banned countless times for dangerous behaviour on and off the ball, should he also be banned for life or banned for longer than 4 months as he has committed dangerous tackles on more than 3 occasions including headbutts, stamping on players backs as they lie on the floor, kicking players, stamping on players hands as they are on the floor, elbowing players, grabbing players throats, two footed jumping tackles that are intentionally aimed at hurting the other player and punching players in the face amongst other things ?

Yes.

Only just noticed this as CS is on my foe list.

Yes repeat offenders should be banned for life.

If you intentionally elbow somebody properly (I'm not on about brushing someones face with your arm,) and it's caught on camera and you do it THREE times, out of the game you go. Same with headbutts, punches, spitting and biting.

2 footed tackles are a bit different due to the diving that goes on in the game but if (like Keane) it can be shown it was intentional then yeah.

3 strikes and your out.

Any Liverpool fan that is currently sticking up for Suarez would be baying for blood if RVP had done that THREE times.

For 4L's He was seeing a sports physcologist (*spelling) after the SECOND incident, the guys got real problems and until there's a real punishment (the fine is what, half a weeks wages) he'll more than likely do it again.

Someone who does what Roy Keane did should be banned instantly, that could have ended a guys career and earning cabability, same when Ben Thatcher practically assaulted Pedro Mendes, he should have been kicked out of sport.

Not condoning what Suarez has done but there certainly are worse things that have happened that haven't received comments like "lock him up" from pundits.

A lot of the problems Hampo is that they're classed as 'one off' incidents, Suarez has done this 3 times and if it had been on the street probably would be locked up.

Didn't Darren Ferguson go down a few years ago for headbutting someone in the Scottish league?

Derbymanc wrote:Only just noticed this as CS is on my foe list.

Yes repeat offenders should be banned for life.

If you intentionally elbow somebody properly (I'm not on about brushing someones face with your arm,) and it's caught on camera and you do it THREE times, out of the game you go. Same with headbutts, punches, spitting and biting.

2 footed tackles are a bit different due to the diving that goes on in the game but if (like Keane) it can be shown it was intentional then yeah.

3 strikes and your out.

Any Liverpool fan that is currently sticking up for Suarez would be baying for blood if RVP had done that THREE times.

For 4L's He was seeing a sports physcologist (*spelling) after the SECOND incident, the guys got real problems and until there's a real punishment (the fine is what, half a weeks wages) he'll more than likely do it again.

...and how many people did he bite when playing for Liverpool last season? How many red cards did he get, how many yellow cards did he get, how many dangerous tackles did he make? His attitude for Liverpool was exemplary and that was, I believe in part, to the fact that the club had provided the services of therapist. I just wonder if Uruguay were aware that this was something that had been shown to be beneficial to Suarez as it's clear that when under pressure, Suarez either excels or repels. He does indeed require professional help and were he to fall through the cracks and not get the help he requires, football will have failed him and society will have condemned him to the scrapheap like it does so many other mental health sufferers.

The media mocked Frank Bruno when he was first sectioned yet now his issues have help highlight a much wider problem within boxing. Perhaps, it's time to start looking at footballers in a similar manner. People pity and mock Gazza in equal measure yet it's clear he desperately needs help. Kenny Sansom recently revealed he'd been living rough due to his alcoholism but now appears to be getting back on track. Joey Barton is one of the sports vilest individuals but suddenly he's giving lectures at Oxford and appearing on Question Time when I can clearly recall the **** deliberately punching Morgan Gamst Pedersen in the stomach then claiming it was with the flat of his hand. Why is a serial Mr Winklechops like Barton allowed redemption yet Suarez is to be hung drawn and quartered? Many of the people demanding Suarez be taken outside and executed are the same people bemoaning the fact that John Terry should have been selected for England.

Some people need to have a long hard look at themselves and I don't think it's just Luis Suarez.

Part of the wider issue for me, is every time Suarez crosses that line he has an army of apologists convincing him that the rest of the world has the problem, not him.

FIFA should mandated counseling for him with the condition that until hes cleared by an independent group, he doesn't play.

You've got a really good point Dave, the problem is that in no way should it exonnerate Suarez in the slightest and if the good part of this is that every footballer is looked at a little bit more then so be it.

You cannot keep justifying his actions with, well he's got mental problems. He should know if he needs the help and if not he shouldn't be allowed near a footy field until he gets it.

People might not like to acknowledge it but these antics do filter down to the grass roots level and could turn into another problem that has to be dealt with. (Diving and lunging tackles are a problem at ours at the minute.)

Incidents like the Keane and Thatchers ones shouldn't matter if they're one off or not, especially the Thatcher one as he could have seriously injured Mendes that day.

Personally two footed tackles, elbows etc go relatively unpunished in comparison to this when they are in fact more dangerous.

I'm not actually sure why 2 footed tackles aren't dealt with more harshly and if an automatic 5 game ban+ came in for them I'd be happy.

Elbows are the same (as mentioned above) it doesn't and shouldn't take away from what Suarez has done and nor should it be used as an excuse not to punish him harshly. If anything it should put a spotlight on the whole thing and bring harsher punishments to everyone for it.

Keane's tackle was premeditated assault. He should have been jailed for it.

The Special Juan wrote:Keane's tackle was premeditated assault.  He should have been jailed for it.

I would think this happens a lot, to be fair. Most players of course will be more discreet.

Some very good debating here. Of course the problem is of fair, consistent judgements for all regardless of status and size of country/team. That will never happen unfortunately. If you can try to imagine yourself as coming from a little country-heh,like Uruquay-then you will be hard-wired into the belief that you are a victim of racism, neocolonialism and unfair pressure by, and favouritism to, the bigger countries.

Does anyone here seriously imagine that this harsh judgement would have been handed down to a German, or Brazilian, player?

Yes I do Azabache,

It was something seen around the world and disgusted all. The thing that a lot of people seem to forget is that it wasn't a first offence, if it was the punishment wouldn't have been anywhere near as harsh and we'd have stopped talking about it in the morning.

I think it does help that Fifa had to be seen to be doing something good after the scandals going on.

It wouldn't matter if it was Suarez or Lionel Messi, had any other player made a deliberate attempt to bite another player I'm certain people would have been just as shocked and disgusted. The fact it's Suarez has nothing to do with the length of his ban, it's the fact that he's done it before which has resulted in him being banned for 4 months.

Press, fans and pundits have all been equally dismissive of the likes of Pepe and Valencia who have also been sent off deservedly. We all know that deliberate and violent conduct have no place in the game and even though many have been angered by the ref's decision, deep down, they all know those were the right choices to make.

What we need now though, is for officials to take a harsher stance on cheating, feigning injury, diving, abuse of officals, waving imaginary cards etc.

You cannot demand action be taken against the likes of Luis Suarez when week after week, game after game, certain individuals can to seen trying to cheat their way to victory and still try hold ourselves up as moral arbiters.

It's either ALL wrong or none of it is. The Rule book isn't a buffet where you can pick and choice the bits you like and discard the bits that you don't.

Agree! When will we enter this halcyon age?

Agree with Dave completely.

One of the wider problems is that diving and the like seem to be accepted in most of the world bar the U.K.

I'm sure it was Gary Neville that said (of Sturridge I think) when he failed to go down in the box that European clubs were laughing at us as they teach that kind of thing.

http://www.ftbpro.com/posts/jamie.spencer/867991/gary-neville-england-players-must-learn-to-dive

Azabache wrote:Some very good debating here. Of course the problem is of fair, consistent judgements for all regardless of status and size of country/team. That will never happen unfortunately. If you can try to imagine yourself as coming from a little country-heh,like Uruquay-then you will be hard-wired into the belief that you are a victim of racism, neocolonialism and unfair pressure by, and favouritism to, the bigger countries.

Does anyone here seriously imagine that this harsh judgement would have been handed down to a German, or Brazilian, player?

My thoughts exactly.

If we look at what he did interms of damage caused in context to what other players have done then suarez's ban seems rather excessive.

If we look at what he did in context to how many times he has repeated the same or similer offences then again his ban seems rather excessive because other players, most notably Pepe have committed very dangerous tackles including punches, headbutts and elbows over a dozen times and Fifa does not ban them for 4 months.

Azabache wrote:Agree! When will we enter this halcyon age?

I've emailed Mr Blatter and he's emailed back saying that this is something he has been considering giving serious consideration to for some considerable time given everything that needs to be considered.

He's proposed holding a meeting to discuss the possibility of having talks about the likelihood of a get together to discuss the chances of action being taken to finally set a date to start doing something about it.

All in all, I'm quite hopeful

 

DAVE667 wrote:

Azabache wrote:Agree! When will we enter this halcyon age?

I've emailed Mr Blatter and he's emailed back saying that this is something he has been considering giving serious consideration to for some considerable time given everything that needs to be considered.

He's proposed holding a meeting to discuss the possibility of having talks about the likelihood of a get together to discuss the chances of action being taken to finally set a date to start doing something about it.

All in all, I'm quite hopeful

        

Excellent!

After having time to give it some thought, I think FIFA got it about right.

While biting is obviously unacceptable and Count Chompula IS a serial offender, its not like he lunged into a leg-breaker tackle or busted someone's head open.

While the individual offence wasn't THAT bad, he clearly hasn't leanred his lesson from previous occasions, so the ban needed to be reasonably severe. Was rather surprised FIFA decided to include domestic football in the ban, but it'll be funny watching the Scousers cry over it.

Denying Uruguay their "star" striker for the rest of the tournament is exactly right and proper IMO. If, god forbid, they actually end up winnning the World Cup, the sight of Snappy McBitesalot, holding the trophy aloft, would set a very bad example.

To be honest, I hope he does get a dog's abuse during the whole of the PL season (once he eventually comes back). If thousands of jeering opposition supporters doesn't ram the message home, I have no idea what will.

Even Eric Cantona only tried his kung-fu kick once.

Are you annoyed its 4 months CS? Cos you keep throwing things in about Pepe etc, but I don't a) think his compares or b) think it really matters in this specific case.

Dolphin Ziggler wrote:Are you annoyed its 4 months CS? Cos you keep throwing things in about Pepe etc, but I don't a) think his compares or b) think it really matters in this specific case.

To be honest I am not sure what I think of the ban. Committing the same off the ball offence 3 times does deserve a punishment but I would have thought that the 9 international games would have been sufficient considering that would rule him out of the rest of the WC and the Copa America next year so that is 2 major tournaments he will miss.

I do think it does matter to compare Suarez's offence with Pepe's and others etc when looking at sentences being fair and just and proportionate. Why is suarez's sentence 25x longer than Pepe's sentence? Both were off the ball offences, both caused no damage, and both players have a history of off the ball fouls so you would assume both players would receive the same or similer sentences.

The great Diego Maradona has commented on this, and, I'm afraid, his view will be pretty much echoed in South America. He calls FIFA a Mafia by the way.