Luis Suarez - Mod Note Post #1, #585 and #602

Vanolder

Pro. F wrote: »

What other players have gotten away with is not the point of what I was asking you. I certainly don't agree with any player getting away with multiple headbutts and spitting and I haven't said anything to indicate otherwise. Bringing it up in response to my question is pathetic dodging.

It is ridiculous to argue that a player's history shouldn't be taken into account when assessing his punishment. Previous behaviour assessment is a basic part of all disciplinary systems.

I was merely highlighting the contradicition in the hysteria - I've outlined my feelings on the incident after my response to you.

Lukker-

A 6 game ban would pretty much be a 2 year ban from international football. People clamoring for more or a club ban need a reality check.

It's hard to fathom what goes through his head when he does it or what compels him. I've been bitten in a match before and it's not really the pain or the injury that gets you but more so the "what the f*ck are you at?", it also leaves you feeling strangely violated.

Anyway he clearly needs help, the fact that he's a grown man and has been caught 3 times doing it proves this.

It's such a shame too, because he's probably the 3rd best player in the world at the moment and he should lighting up this World Cup, not disgracing it.

niallo27

Neeson wrote: »

Because with the bite you can get diseases into your bloodstream. Nibbling could be tolerated but not if you draw blood. God knows what diseases he's carrying.

Sharing bottles of water is actually a lot more dangerous for footballers.

MacBizzle

Neeson wrote: »

Because with the bite you can get diseases into your bloodstream. Nibbling could be tolerated but not if you draw blood. God knows what diseases he's carrying.

Also, he didn't draw blood.

Saulcortez

Neeson wrote: »

Because with the bite you can get diseases into your bloodstream. Nibbling could be tolerated but not if you draw blood. God knows what diseases he's carrying.

That's highly unlikely, a headbutt or punch is likely to do much worse damage.

Pro. F

Vanolder wrote: »

I was merely highlighting the contradicition in the hysteria - I've outlined my feelings on the incident after my response to you.

No, you weren't merely outlining the contradictions. You specifically posted about his previous incidents of biting as if you thought that they should not be considered for his punishment:

Vanolder wrote: »

He served time for his previous, and they were with club, this is on international duty.

jmayo

osarusan wrote: »

I think these posts calling for a worldwide ban are pretty funny.

Why shouldn't he get a world wide ban.
The guy is a serial offender, he has been banned for the exact same thing in two leagues already and he brought the game into disrepute on the biggest stage.

No way should he get anything near a liftetime ban or even close to a year, but he should be banned for a few months or x numebr of games if no games and made goto counseling along with being made toe the line for a number of years on pain of getting longer ban.

And if he doesn't get a ban that involves PL, I still think Liverpool should hit him with massive fine and a match ban.
He has brought the club's name into disrepute once again, because like it or not Liverpool's good name is being hit by this guy's behaviour.

BTW before the usual shyt* about man u fans, I have a been a huge ABU since the days of Ron Atkinson so please doing start going down that route.
And as for the drivel spouted by some Liverpool fans around here ...

I also think this whole saga is showing how some think footballers/sports people should somehow be treated dfifferently just because they have an aptitude and a talent to run around a field, track, etc.
Most of these sports people, esepcially soccer players, are very handsomely paid, make millions from advertising, make millions from our kids, yet they behave like spoilt children and assh*les rather than acting as roles models who should be damm grateful for their success.

Vanolder

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

How could you possibly think that diving is worse than biting an opposition player?

Because it is ruining the sport... It has ruined the sport. There will always be isolated incidents of violent conduct in sport, things boil over, but can be dealt with. Diving etc is cultural and needs to be wiped out with severe punishments to rid the game of it. I'd have more respect for the mad bast**d that bit me than the guy rolling around feigning injury or diving to win a peno.

Will I Amnt

niallo27 wrote: »

He is not saying that and you know that. He is saying why the outrage for one and nothing for the other.

If there was a shed load of Atletico fans here making light of it, saying it's no big deal, sure diving is worse...then maybe there would be some outrage towards him.

Pro. F

Lukker- wrote: »

A 6 game ban would pretty much be a 2 year ban from international football. People clamoring for more or a club ban need a reality check.

It's hard to fathom what goes through his head when he does it or what compels him. I've been bitten in a match before and it's not really the pain or the injury that gets you but more so the "what the f*ck are you at?", it also leaves you feeling strangely violated.

Anyway he clearly needs help, the fact that he's a grown man and has been caught 3 times doing it proves this.

It's such a shame too, because he's probably the 3rd best player in the world at the moment and he should lighting up this World Cup, not disgracing it.

The fact that he has already been punished twice and is still doing it would indicate that another, similar, punishment is not going to change his behaviour. Biting is not acceptable and he shows not the slightest intention to change his ways. He has to get a more severe ban.

Will I Amnt

Vanolder wrote: »

Because it is ruining the sport... It has ruined the sport. There will always be isolated incidents of violent conduct in sport, things boil over, but can be dealt with. Diving etc is cultural and needs to be wiped out with severe punishments to rid the game of it. I'd have more respect for the mad bast**d that bit me than the guy rolling around feigning injury or diving to win a peno.

3 times is not an isolated incident.

Mr Detail

I am a liverpool fan. I think he should be banned the maximum permissable (only international of course) ha ha.

Neeson

I suppose biting is not human. Not condoning the headbutts or punching but it's easier to do and easier to see why someone would do that to hurt someone when angry. Biting someone is very strange though. You have to have a bit of a taste for a person to do that.

By punching and all those other things you cause damage but don't have to be getting the persons stuff in your tastebuds.

Vanolder

Will I Amnt wrote: »

If there was a shed load of Atletico fans here making light of it, saying it's no big deal, sure diving is worse...then maybe there would be some outrage towards him.

No one is making light of it.. (I think but I haven't read the whole thread) some of us are trying to reign in some of the ott reaction to it is all.

Panthro

He'll be a busy boy...
Apparently he's signed a deal with Nike..."just chew it"
And hes also bringing out a song too... His own take on a Michael Jackson classic..."just eat it"...

(I'll be off)

Will I Amnt

Vanolder wrote: »

No one is making light of it.. (I think but I haven't read the whole thread) some of us are trying to reign in some of the ott reaction to it is all.

I've read the thread and there has been, was it not you that just said diving and spitting is worse?

MacBizzle

Neeson wrote: »

I suppose biting is not human. Not condoning the headbutts or punching but it's easier to do and easier to see why someone would do that to hurt someone when angry. Biting someone is very strange though. You have to have a bit of a taste for a person to do that.

By punching and all those other things you cause damage but don't have to be getting the persons stuff in your tastebuds.

They're just as bad as each other imo.

Vanolder

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I've read the thread and there has been, was it not you that just said diving and spitting is worse?

Read my reasoning behind it- I already said the man deserves a ban, what more do you want?

super_furry

Will I Amnt wrote: »

3 times is not an isolated incident.

Sure it is. Luis Suarez has played 361 professional games and only bit people in three of them, that's less than 1% of the games he's played. Luis Suarez only bites people in 0.8310249307479225% of the games he plays in and up until yesterday that percentage was falling all the time. Pretty isolated if you ask me and science.

In fact, lets go further. As he faces 11 opponents minimum in each game, he's faced at the very least 3971 players and only bit three of them. He's only bit .07% of the players he's played against - again very isolated.

Smithwicks Man

Vanolder wrote: »

Because it is ruining the sport... It has ruined the sport. There will always be isolated incidents of violent conduct in sport, things boil over, but can be dealt with. Diving etc is cultural and needs to be wiped out with severe punishments to rid the game of it. I'd have more respect for the mad bast**d that bit me than the guy rolling around feigning injury or diving to win a peno.

I'd be in disagreement with that because I think any violent conduct, especially biting, is worse than diving.

Also, diving is a very grey area. How often do you hear people giving out about a player diving when they didn't actually dive. Going down easily is not diving. Actual full simulation when there is no contact is far less common than you'd think.

The referees are to blame as well. It's gotten to the stage where if a player is being fouled and doesn't go down, he probably won't get the free - and you see it all the time. The players know it now so they 9 times out of ten they will go down if they think they're being fouled. Who could blame them.

Unfortunately, it's become such an issue that players are constantly going down when there's contact but they're not being fouled and it's very disrupting but you hear people saying a player dived when they actually went down easily and there's a difference. Sure I heard people arguing that Samaras dived last night for Greece's penalty when the contact was clear as day.


Blatantly feigning injury is another story and if a player feigns injury in order to get another player sent off when there was no contact then it should be retrospectively dealt with after the game and be an automatic 1 game ban.

Smithwicks Man

super_furry wrote: »

Sure it is. Luis Suarez has played 361 professional games and only bit people in three of them, that's less than 1% of the games he's played. Luis Suarez only bites people in 0.8310249307479225% of the games he plays in and up until yesterday that percentage was falling all the time. Pretty isolated if you ask me and science.

In fact, lets go further. As he faces 11 opponents minimum in each game, he's faced at the very least 3971 players and only bit three of them. He's only bit .07% of the players he's played against - again very isolated.

Not sure if this is a joke or if you're actually using those stats to defend what he did? :eek:

Lukker-

Pro. F wrote: »

The fact that he has already been punished twice and is still doing it would indicate that another, similar, punishment is not going to change his behaviour. Biting is not acceptable and he shows not the slightest intention to change his ways. He has to get a more severe ban.

That would just be Fifa pandering to the media, which would be counter-productive.

I agree if it happened in domestic football, it should be a 15-20 game ban. But it's not and there is zero precedent for bans handed out by Fifa for both. They would be over-stepping their boundaries.

I'm sure there are plenty of examples of players who have histories of violent conduct in domestic football who have been banned for similar offences in a World Cup yet they would never receive a ban from both games.

Would a bigger ban on its own even help? He's been banned for 10 games before which in my eyes is quite a lengthy ban, what good would a 20 game ban do?

Mandatory counselling along with a 6 game ban. People are letting their hearts rule over their heads in this one.

super_furry

Smithwicks Man wrote: »

Not sure if this is a joke or if you're actually using those stats to defend what he did? :eek:

Come on you know you can't argue with science. Next of all you'll be telling me that the earth is square! If you're a professional footballer who comes up against Luis Suarez, you're 99.93% sure that you won't be biten. I find that reassuring.

Fr. Ned

Luis should seek psychiatric help for what is obviously a mental issue.

A long ban will serve no purpose other than to keep his usual critics on here and elsewhere happy.

Most geniuses have their flaws, he needs to iron this one out.


The calls for lifetime or 2 year bans are hysterical in the extreme.

MacBizzle

Fr. Ned wrote: »

Luis should seek psychiatric help for what is obviously a mental issue.

A long ban will serve no purpose other than to keep his usual critics on here and elsewhere happy.

Most geniuses have their flaws, he needs to iron this one out.


The calls for lifetime or 2 year bans are hysterical in the extreme.

He'll need a ban simply to discourage others from doing the same thing, and to keep everyone happy. Won't do him any good though, he clearly has anger/mental issues that need some sorting out. I feel sorry for him really.

Will I Amnt

Vanolder wrote: »

Read my reasoning behind it- I already said the man deserves a ban, what more do you want?

I don't want anything. I've read your reasoning and don't agree with it. As long as there's people here making excuses or making light of the incident there will be people opposing it. If you think about it, you're doing more harm than good.

niallo27

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I don't want anything. I've read your reasoning and don't agree with it. As long as there's people here making excuses or making light of the incident there will be people opposing it. If you think about it, you're doing more harm than good.

In fairness your doing you bit. 39 posts now you must be exhausted. Go get some sleep.

MacBizzle

niallo27 wrote: »

In fairness your doing you bit. 39 posts now you must be exhausted. Go get some sleep.

Don't go get the thread closed

Pro. F

Lukker- wrote: »

That would just be Fifa pandering to the media, which would be counter-productive.

I agree if it happened in domestic football, it should be a 15-20 game ban. But it's not and there is zero precedent for bans handed out by Fifa for both. They would be over-stepping their boundaries.

I'm sure there are plenty of examples of players who have histories of violent conduct in domestic football who have been banned for similar offences in a World Cup yet they would never receive a ban from both games.

Would a bigger ban on its own even help? He's been banned for 10 games before which in my eyes is quite a lengthy ban, what good would a 20 game ban do?

Mandatory counselling along with a 6 game ban. People are letting their heads rule over their hearts in this one.

It would only be pandering to the media if FIFA didn't think a lengthy ban was the right thing to do in the first place. For me, a lengthy ban from club and country is definitely the right thing to do. It would significantly affect his career and his earning potential and that is likely to be a powerful incentive for him to change his behaviour (more so than the previous, shorter bans). It would also indicate that FIFA take protecting their players from being bitten seriously, which they should.

I understand the difficulty with a lack of precedent and that a club ban may not be an option for FIFA. It is possible to set a precedent, if you're acting within the laws/rules/regulations. If their regulations allow them to co-ordinate international and league bans then they should do it. If their regulations don't allow them to coordinate, then they should work to fix that.

In the end, if a serial biter can tarnish the WC with this behaviour and still be playing regularly come the following season then the system isn't working.

super_furry

Will I Amnt wrote: »

I don't want anything. I've read your reasoning and don't agree with it. As long as there's people here making excuses or making light of the incident there will be people opposing it. If you think about it, you're doing more harm than good.

YEAH! And if you think about it even further Vanolder - like really, really far - it's actually your fault that the whole thing happened.

We're through the looking glass here folks.

Vanolder

niallo27 wrote: »

In fairness your doing you bit. 39 posts now you must be exhausted. Go get some sleep.

39 posts!!? :eek:

Villain

Fr. Ned wrote: »

Luis should seek psychiatric help for what is obviously a mental issue.

A long ban will serve no purpose other than to keep his usual critics on here and elsewhere happy.

Most geniuses have their flaws, he needs to iron this one out.


The calls for lifetime or 2 year bans are hysterical in the extreme.

So a short ban each time he bites?

Pizzle

super_furry wrote: »

Sure it is. Luis Suarez has played 361 professional games and only bit people in three of them, that's less than 1% of the games he's played. Luis Suarez only bites people in 0.8310249307479225% of the games he plays in and up until yesterday that percentage was falling all the time. Pretty isolated if you ask me and science.

In fact, lets go further. As he faces 11 opponents minimum in each game, he's faced at the very least 3971 players and only bit three of them. He's only bit .07% of the players he's played against - again very isolated.

Science overload.

SlickRic

Will I Amnt wrote: »

If you think about it, you're doing more harm than good.

nobody's opinions on a message board, no matter how loony, are doing any harm or good in the grand scheme of things.

Skylinehead

niallo27 wrote: »

In fairness your doing you bit. 39 posts now you must be exhausted. Go get some sleep.

You seem to love post tallies for some reason.

Davei141

I think sadly that will be the end of Suarez in England, he will see the English media were the ones really leading the whole controversy and will decide to feck off. Who could blame him? "Best league in the world" just hounded its best player out of the league. It will be funny watching Suarez get banned for 10 games while Pepe gets 1 game ban for a headbutt. Jim Boyce can go and feck off getting involved playing up to the anti Suarez sentiments, he wouldn't be saying anything if it was any other player.

vidor

Davei141 wrote: »

he wouldn't be saying anything if it was any other player.

What other player is going around biting players?

Fr. Ned

Villain wrote: »

So a short ban each time he bites?

I'd be more concerned about getting the guy some mental help so he doesn't do it again.
He seems to be a decent lad by all accounts, does a lot of charity work etc and is a good family man.
He's not the type to be photographed rolling out of nightclubs p1ssed or the type that knocks off his brothers/teammates birds or stuff like that so I'd reckon this is a long standing mental issue that needs to be addressed.

A bit of perspective wouldn't go amiss on this thread.

Karl Stein

super_furry wrote: »

Luis Suarez only bites people in 0.8310249307479225% of the games he plays

He's only bit .07% of the players he's played against - again very isolated.

Those are magnificent statistics but they do not consider the immeasurable rate of damage that the biting incident will undoubtedly cause in the wider population.

Consider this.

500 million people witness the Saurez biting incident. Now let's say 200 million of them are children - it would only require 5% of these children to copy-cat bite another person out of frustration for there to be 10,000,000 victims of biting.

That's 10 million people bitten because of one Saurez's taste for flesh.

I would recommend that Saurez be blasted into space in a one man prison vessel to spend the rest of his life with nothing but water and a lifetime supply of jumbones.

Will I Amnt

niallo27 wrote: »

In fairness your doing you bit. 39 posts now you must be exhausted. Go get some sleep.

Got a grand sleep last night Niall, thanks for your concern. I'll make no excuses for my posting here, I unashamedly love to hate Suarez, he's the perfect pantomime villain. Then you throw in the fans that bend over backwards so much to help his case that their head ends up in their own arse, it's car crash stuff and ultimately entertaining.

I haven't once said he should be banned for any amount of time, I've just argued points that I think are plain wrong and I make no apologies for that.

Will I Amnt

SlickRic wrote: »

nobody's opinions on a message board, no matter how loony, are doing any harm or good in the grand scheme of things.

I meant to his own cause.

Corholio

Davei141 wrote: »

I think sadly that will be the end of Suarez in England, he will see the English media were the ones really leading the whole controversy and will decide to feck off. Who could blame him? "Best league in the world" just hounded its best player out of the league. It will be funny watching Suarez get banned for 10 games while Pepe gets 1 game ban for a headbutt. Jim Boyce can go and feck off getting involved playing up to the anti Suarez sentiments, he wouldn't be saying anything if it was any other player.

Not this 'hounded him out' ****e again. If Suarez doesn't go and bite anyone, nothing happens. It was that way the first time he did it......the second time he did it.........and the third time as well. Pepe didnt actually 'headbutt' Muller either, he was rightly sent off for putting his head aggressively, but it wasn't a headbutt. Suarez bit into Chiellini's shoulder.....actually bit someone......for the third time. Let that sink in for a while before this 'hounded' nonsense is wheeled out again.

murpho999

It appears to me that people only want Suarez banned for life because of club allegiances and who he is.

What if it had been another player who did it?

K-9

vidor wrote: »

What other player is going around biting players?

Nobody, which makes it worse. Players getting away with headbuts and diving are just part of the game now really.

Bite me

Tasden

murpho999 wrote: »

It appears to me that people only want Suarez banned for life because of club allegiances and who he is.

What if it had been another player who did it?

Another player wouldn't have done it twice before though

Rayne Wooney

360 posts since this morning, someone update me has he requested a trial by combat yet?

murpho999

murpho999 wrote: »

It appears to me that people only want Suarez banned for life because of club allegiances and who he is.

What if it had been another player who did it?

Exactly.

Ferdinand only got 6 months for the drug thing, and that ex Chelsea fella got a few years.

A life ban for biting would be ridiculous. Not many people calling for this only Joe Duffy types I'd imagine.

Even normal Utd fans I work with think he shouldn't be banned from club football

Headshot

I would like to hope if utd had a WC player and was a repeat offender of scummy behaviour, they would sell said player right away. No player is bigger than the club and if you have a bad apple letting down your club domestically and abroad, they have to go.

EyeSight

murpho999 wrote: »

It appears to me that people only want Suarez banned for life because of club allegiances and who he is.

What if it had been another player who did it?

you'll always get those people. Just ignore them.

I don't think he should be banned for life, but some harsh punishment is needed. This is his 3rd time doing it and the last ban was for 10 games(harsh enough). So it will take something to get him to stop doing this

It's a little sad for him because he's a great player and had a great drama free season. Now no matter what he achieves, in the history books he will be known as the dirty player who kept biting people