Luis Suárez

[Shaggy]

It sends out the message that "FIFA will not tolerate this behaviour" which is what most were wanting so it achieves exactly what FIFA want- to save face. But it most likely achieves very little in terms of correcting luis' behaviour. However, it might force him to work harder at the rehab.

Is there even any mandatory rehab as part of the punishment? I don't think there is. Just shows how interested they really are in helping Suarez get over his problem and making sure it doesn't happen again. As you say they just want to 'save face'.

[rodo]

apparently says suarez has to apologize to finish negotiations

[fah-q]

It's madness to consider selling him but I think we are being forced into a corner here.

I don't give a **** what other people are saying about us, but the club will care if it starts impacting our commercial deals particularly with the stadium redevelopment underway.

IAFN.

[john316]

Barca probably think they can get him for £10m plus Bojan and Tello now

EDIT: 888Poker have terminated their agreement with Suarez so that is one deal down.

[fah-q]

apparently says suarez has to apologize to finish negotiations

Whoever did the design for that magazine needs to hand his style back to the 80's.

[G]

He managed to get through alot of his career on the pitch without biting anyone up until the Ajax one so he can be helped and he should be helped. I'd also only flog him if they match the release clause in his contract. It was good enough last week after two previous bites it's good enough this week too, especially if the ban is reduced on appeal.

[kingfunk]

I reckon the ban will be suspended for 2 months on appeal.

[Shaggy]

http://www.888poker.com/ambassadors/luis-suarez.htm

888poker signed Luis Suarez following a fantastic season for which his achievements were widely recognized. Regrettably, following his actions during Uruguay’s World Cup match against Italy on Tuesday, 888poker has decided to terminate its relationship with Luis Suarez with immediate effect.

[rodo]

spot on this

Social media is not always the best guide to public opinion, but it has been revealing on the Luis Suarez issue. Inevitably there are some saying he should be hung, drawn and quartered, and others arguing he has been framed. Many of the extreme judgements are partisan but even among ‘neutrals’ there is a wide divergence of opinion.


What is telling is how many humorous responses there are. Various themed menus, lots of references to Jaws and Hannibal Lecter and so on. Among the most notable is a photo of Giorgio Chiellini, the assaulted player, posing with a woman who is pretending to bite him. Chiellini is smiling. Another photo shows the Brazilian striker Fred pretending to chew on a team-mate.



Then there is the video of Will Ferrell’s appearance at a US supporters’ event. He is introduced by Sunil Gulati, the president of the USSF, as a new player. Ferrell promises, to huge cheers, he will “bite every German player” if he has to, to win the game.

What is the relevance of all this? Imagine if Suarez had broken Chiellini’s leg with a wild tackle or shattered his eye socket with an elbow. How many jokes do you think there would be on Twitter then?



What Suarez did was unacceptable, gruesome and deserves punishment. But to a lot of people it is also rather funny, which is why Fifa’s sentence is disproportionate. Suarez obviously has a problem that manifests itself, when he is frustrated that events are not going his way, by biting. But for this he needs treatment from whichever mental health specialist is deemed appropriate, not one of the severest bans in the history of the game.

Part of the reaction is shaped by our long-standing and entirely understandable cultural horror of cannibalism. Suarez, though, was not actually trying to “eat” Chiellini any more than he was trying to “eat” Otman Bakkal or Branislav Ivanovic. He was trying to hurt them in a fit of temper, but not in a particularly brutal manner. Roy Keane’s assault on Alf Inge-Haaland shows what can happen when a player deliberately aims to injure another.



Of all the many tweets received following an article in this space on the subject yesterday, the most powerful was from a parks player who had been forced to undergo nine operations on his knee after suffering a two-footed tackle. His view was he would much rather have been bitten, and a three-match ban was sufficient.



Given Suarez’s repeated offences and the stage, I would have imposed the standard three-match ban for violent behaviour and added a ban from all football activities for the rest of the World Cup.

How much more imaginative and proportionate it would have been to make this a suspended sentence conditional on his undergoing treatment, to be activated if Suarez reoffended or refused medical help.

[dom9]

It sends out the message that "FIFA will not tolerate this behaviour" which is what most were wanting so it achieves exactly what FIFA want- to save face. But it most likely achieves very little in terms of correcting luis' behaviour. However, it might force him to work harder at the rehab.

If only they were as intolerant about their own internal misdemeanours eh?

[Vermilion]

spot on this

Social media is not always the best guide to public opinion, but it has been revealing on the Luis Suarez issue. Inevitably there are some saying he should be hung, drawn and quartered, and others arguing he has been framed. Many of the extreme judgements are partisan but even among ‘neutrals’ there is a wide divergence of opinion.


What is telling is how many humorous responses there are. Various themed menus, lots of references to Jaws and Hannibal Lecter and so on. Among the most notable is a photo of Giorgio Chiellini, the assaulted player, posing with a woman who is pretending to bite him. Chiellini is smiling. Another photo shows the Brazilian striker Fred pretending to chew on a team-mate.



Then there is the video of Will Ferrell’s appearance at a US supporters’ event. He is introduced by Sunil Gulati, the president of the USSF, as a new player. Ferrell promises, to huge cheers, he will “bite every German player” if he has to, to win the game.

What is the relevance of all this? Imagine if Suarez had broken Chiellini’s leg with a wild tackle or shattered his eye socket with an elbow. How many jokes do you think there would be on Twitter then?



What Suarez did was unacceptable, gruesome and deserves punishment. But to a lot of people it is also rather funny, which is why Fifa’s sentence is disproportionate. Suarez obviously has a problem that manifests itself, when he is frustrated that events are not going his way, by biting. But for this he needs treatment from whichever mental health specialist is deemed appropriate, not one of the severest bans in the history of the game.

Part of the reaction is shaped by our long-standing and entirely understandable cultural horror of cannibalism. Suarez, though, was not actually trying to “eat” Chiellini any more than he was trying to “eat” Otman Bakkal or Branislav Ivanovic. He was trying to hurt them in a fit of temper, but not in a particularly brutal manner. Roy Keane’s assault on Alf Inge-Haaland shows what can happen when a player deliberately aims to injure another.



Of all the many tweets received following an article in this space on the subject yesterday, the most powerful was from a parks player who had been forced to undergo nine operations on his knee after suffering a two-footed tackle. His view was he would much rather have been bitten, and a three-match ban was sufficient.



Given Suarez’s repeated offences and the stage, I would have imposed the standard three-match ban for violent behaviour and added a ban from all football activities for the rest of the World Cup.

How much more imaginative and proportionate it would have been to make this a suspended sentence conditional on his undergoing treatment, to be activated if Suarez reoffended or refused medical help.

It truly is.

[Shaggy]

Paul Morrissey @Paul_Morrissey
Stadium ban is out of order, kicking Suarez when he's down. Been treated like some sort of sex pest. No practicality other than to shame him

Paul Morrissey @Paul_Morrissey
Suarez bit someone on the pitch, FIFA only have jurisdiction to punish him in that context. Banning him from stadiums infringes civil rights

Paul Morrissey @Paul_Morrissey
What are FIFA saying exactly by putting a tacit restraining order on Suarez? Passive-aggressively labeling him a menace to society.

[Reece]

Stadium ban is one thing, but banning him from hotels too (if that bit was true) is just bizarre and I have no idea how they think they have the right to do that.

[Yozza]

I'd still have him. There's no way I'm castigating him for what he's done. It hurts us but love is unconditional. Some of you have no heart or are too selfish.

I'd keep him but I would severely castigate the ****er - ****ing stupid bloke who just won't learn but still one of the best footballers I've ever seen

I can understand people who say we should get shot & draw a line but I still love the ****....

[kev776]

I'd still have him. There's no way I'm castigating him for what he's done. It hurts us but love is unconditional. Some of you have no heart or are too selfish.

What utter bollox Nige, it is not love and it is certainly not unconditional. The man is either sick or a grade A bellend. Either way he has let us down for the 3rd time big time, no other walk of life would a senior professional be allowed x3 such incidents. If he is not sick, it is Gross misconduct and a sackable offence in normal industry.

Over 30 ****ing games he has now been banned for and probably been paid for all of them.

An utter cunt.