to think that Suarez's 10 match ban is totally justified?

(118 Posts)
CoolCadbury Wed 24-Apr-13 22:35:44

I am not a football fan but the bite incident was shocking - it was like a toddler having a tantrum but a grown man doing it was just vile.

What pisses me off was that Liverpool FC saying they were surprised and disappointed with it? Wtf? What else do they expect? They should be fined too for not being able to control their player.

He may still be nominated for player of the season because he is so talented!

Entitled prick.

NeverKnowinglyUnderstood Wed 24-Apr-13 22:37:23

totally agree..
not sure why it wasn't a police issue..
if a random man bit another random man in the street it would be assault surely/.

foslady Wed 24-Apr-13 22:37:59

Suarez, you naughty boy, you bit someone, take the rest of the season it's not justified, it should have been worse in my eyes

Runningblue Wed 24-Apr-13 22:38:33

I think he should be banned full stop. Nasty piece of work

McNewPants2013 Wed 24-Apr-13 22:38:42

If this was any other job, he would have been sacked.

I think he should do anger management course before being allowed back on the pitch.

NeverKnowinglyUnderstood Wed 24-Apr-13 22:38:50

can I just check... is that paid time off??

foslady Wed 24-Apr-13 22:39:49

On his wage/sponsorship deals it won't really make much difference Never

CoolCadbury Wed 24-Apr-13 22:40:00

Totally agree that he should be banned totally but let's be realistic, this is football, it ain't ever going to happen.

MadCap Wed 24-Apr-13 22:40:12

Ched Evans got less for rape. Not saying its right just the argument my Liverpool supporting DH keeps making.

I said Evans went to prison and that if Saurez wasn't a footballer and did it to a man on the street, he'd be in the clink too.

HollyBerryBush Wed 24-Apr-13 22:40:23

I presume that would depend whether the victim made a complaint?

Anyway, the FA haven't had their hearing yet.

He got a 7 match ban at Ajax for biting. Wasn't also at the centre of the N -word usage on the pitch?

CoolCadbury Wed 24-Apr-13 22:41:06

Yup, holly.

nancy75 Wed 24-Apr-13 22:42:02

If he had been in the stands he would have been arrested, because he was on the pitch he gets a slap on the wrist, it shows just how serious the fa are when they say they want to get violence ( and racism) out of football.

Runningblue Wed 24-Apr-13 22:45:40

Hasn't he got form for previous incidents? Sure i heard on the radio he'd bitten during a match before.

TiggyD Wed 24-Apr-13 22:47:23

Liverpool fan here. Totally agree with it.

AnyFucker Wed 24-Apr-13 22:52:26

I believe he should get a lifetime ban.

Fucking animal has no place on a football pitch.

He is obviously unstable. He should not be playing football anymore, he should have been dropped long ago.
Liverpool employed him and they make me sick, defending him and his actions. Like any other footballer / sportsperson in the public eye he (& the club) has a responsibility to sportsmanship, youngsters, fans and those who might want to follow in his footsteps.
Ban him from English football is what I say.

Snazzynewyear Wed 24-Apr-13 23:10:07

He has got form for previous incidents, which was supposedly a factor in the FA imposing what for them was a severe punishment. I also suspect that (as I heard on a radio discussion of this earlier today) they have accounted for the fact that the next 4 games are effectively meaningless. When you look at it this way he's actually serving a 6-match ban hmm

AnyFucker Wed 24-Apr-13 23:18:24

A nice little end-of-season holiday for him.

Expect paparazzi pics of him sunning himself on Necker Island (or similar).

he doesn't give a toss, and why would he ?

The ban won't mean anything.

He's bitten before. I mean what adult BITES someone? Even a seven year old wouldn't bite someone! A lifetime ban would be safer and better.

Collaborate Thu 25-Apr-13 00:39:56

Oh dear. The baying mob is out. It was a shocking but ultimately trivial incident. He didn't even leave a mark. Some "bite". John Terry got a 4 game ban for racism.
Suarez never threatened anyone with a career ending injury. Grossly OTT. It's a pantomime in which he's cast as the villain, and the FA are going along with it.

AnyFucker Thu 25-Apr-13 07:14:23

"He didn't even leave a mark"

That's ok then.

BrevilleTron Thu 25-Apr-13 07:24:22

We expect toddlers to bite. They are small sometimes non-verbal children, who often struggle with how to express emotions.

Suarez is an Adult. Who is paid lots of cash to play football and whether he likes it or not this puts him in the position of role model for young boys.

He lost control of himself and should therefore be punished.

Hardly a 'baying mob' dear hmm
Just stating that maybe the punishment should be slightly more than a fine and a match ban.

Lazyjaney Thu 25-Apr-13 07:27:37

Last time he did this was 7 games, so 10 for a 2 nd offence seems about right.

Jengnr Thu 25-Apr-13 07:34:09

It's an excessive ban. Violent conduct is three games. I think this should probably have got a bit extra for the nature of the conduct but ten is massively OTT.

However, I'm a United fan so it is quite funny. smile

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 07:34:34

The biting was out of order, damn right it was. However the FA blatantly have it in for him. No way would say, a player at Man U have got a 10 match ban.

"The racism thing" well that appeared to not be very clear cut. Suarez said "negrito" not "negro" which isnt a racist term. Sounds like Evra was a prized twat as well.

Life time ban for a bite? hmm seems a bit OTT when you think about how many other more serious injuries are punished by a fine and match ban for a few weeks til the furror dies down. Including injuries that ended careers.

Not a Liverpool fan per se but DP is. didnt care one way or another til it became blatant this was another excuse for a have a pop at Suarez bandwagon.

Maryz Thu 25-Apr-13 07:34:45

I don't think it was enough.

Biting is very different from shoving, pushing or even punching. It should be totally taboo in a civilised society.

There is an Irish guy called Trevor Brennan who was banned from rugby for life after punching someone in the stands (who had shouted out insults about his mother, btw). He was banned from playing, coaching or having anything at all to do with rugby for life.

imo a second offence of biting is much worse than a single loss of temper.

normaleggy Thu 25-Apr-13 07:36:18

He didn't leave a mark?! Ha! What a ridiculous comment.

I would also like to point out that fans have been banned for up to 3 years for making racist remarks so I would say that Suarez and Terry got off very lightly.

BrevilleTron Thu 25-Apr-13 07:37:16

Agree with MaryZ about biting being taboo in adult society.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 07:38:28

"John Terry got a 4 game ban for racism."

Indeed, Collaborate. A 4 game ban for saying words - words which a court of law had decided he wasn't guilty of saying. Suarez has been given a 10 match ban for a violent action which he has admitted carrying out and for which he'd undoubtedly be found guilty of in law should Branislav Ivanovic change his mind and decide to press charges.

Suarez has form for biting - this is not the first incident. Unlike Terry's alleged racist words, Suarez's assault was unprovoked, even arguably premeditated. Suarez even had the gall to fake injury after being pushed away by his victim!

Words, however offensive, don't have the potential to cause physical pain, aren't unhygienic and don't carry the chance of transmitting potentially fatal disease. Biting does.

AFAIAC, given Suarez's form for biting and his overall behaviour and tendency to aggression on the pitch a ten match ban is the least he deserves. It should have been accompanied with points deduction for Liverpool and Chelsea being awarded three points for the match which they'd almost certainly have won had the referee not dismissed Ivanovic's complaint and allowed Suarez to remain on the pitch.

Failing that, deport him. Nasty little man.

IntheFrame Thu 25-Apr-13 07:41:30

It's also unsporting and bringing the game into disrepute. Being able to play the game well is not the same as representing your club.

If he can't play with out behaving like an animal he shouldn't be playing at all.

The game of football is a joke. Fans and players are just thugs.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 07:42:22

(Before people start jumping up and down crying "Racist!" the comment "deport him" was tongue in cheek. "Nasty little man", however, wasn't).

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 07:43:27

"The game of football is a joke. Fans and players are just thugs."


Really? All of them? hmm

BrevilleTron Thu 25-Apr-13 07:47:08

That may be a slight sweeping generalisation that all fans and players are thugs.
although would it not solve all the fighting over the one ball if they all had one each? grin

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 07:50:44

grin @BrevilleTron.

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 07:52:36

Erm, think the FA do have it in for him....What ban did Defoe get for biting, oh yeah none!

And the Terry comparisons are relevant, racist comments but shorter ban, refused to shake someone's hand no action....same crimes diff punishment.

Not defending the bite of course, but the punishment is ridiculous in football terms, whether the law would say differently doesn't matter as the FA has different rules (which they ignore for Suarez)

normaleggy Thu 25-Apr-13 07:54:36

I'm a football fan, have had a season ticket for 23 years and I find it very offensive to be labelled as a thug. Only about 5% of fans, if that, could be labelled as such. Don't be so ignorant.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 07:58:56

"And the Terry comparisons are relevant, racist comments but shorter ban, refused to shake someone's hand no action....same crimes diff punishment."

No, shellshock, I'm not having that, saying offensive words or refusing to shake a hand (whose, btw, Bernstein's? If so, that's even further removed, that wasn't on the pitch. Ferdinand's refusal to shake with Terry and Cole was though, what was the punishment there, if we're comparing?), are not the same crimes as committing a physical assault.

I agree with you however that the FA have different rules to a court - clearly the FA thinks it's superior.

dollywobbles Thu 25-Apr-13 08:04:23

Personally, I find high, two-footed challenges far more shocking. They have the potential to end careers.
I don't think Suarez is an entitled prick, either. But I don't know him.

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 08:07:06

TSO I mean relevant in the discussion that the FA treat Suarez differently...not relevant to the bite in particular

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 08:15:31

shellshock. The FA gave a 4 to the man found not guilty in an English law court as they thought he was guilty. He denied this however. He allegedly uttered words under provocation.

They gave a 10 to the man who has admitted violence without provocation and has done it before.

If the FA have treated Suarez differently it's because they are two completely different types of incident under two completely different sets of circumstances.

If you're saying the FA have acted as they have "because it's Suarez", you're 100% right. Except that it's not because of who or what he is, but what he's done and how he did it.

dollywobbles Thu 25-Apr-13 08:16:11

shellshock7 did you read the report of the racism hearing? Just the way they referred to Suarez , it was blatant that they felt he was some sort of second class citizen. It was repugnant.

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 08:38:13

I think we will have to agree to the biting there is no defence, I agree with a ban and he has been fined and going to anger management....I just think the length of the ban is wrong. I disagree with the other points abt the other charges

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 08:41:56

Sorry pressed to soon....I am
Not comparing the length of Terry's ban for racism with Suarezs ban for biting....I am comparing Terry's ban for racism with Suarezs ban for racism. Also you would find him repugnant if you believe Evra....if you don't you will have a different view altogether...

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 08:45:44

And we can see how serious the racism against Evra was and how it affected him by him celebrating winning the league by biting a fake arm...lets see how the FA deal with that one...hmmmm smile

IRCL Thu 25-Apr-13 08:51:56


I personally don't think he should be on the pitch.

Any man that randomly bites people and racially abuses others is not stable enough to be on the pitch. Unfortunately young people look up to him.

He deserves everything he gets and more. Totally spoils the game.

I mean seriously what man bites people?


Shellshock surely he needs a longer ban because evidently his previous shorter ones haven't really taught him anything.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 08:53:30

I'll have to come back to respond to those posts later, shellshock, work calls now. smile

I'll leave you with food for thought - anger management? Suarez doesn't act in anger, he acts with premeditated aggression. There's a huge difference imho.

Until later, have a good day. smile

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 08:58:30

I do agree he has probs, again no defence but they had been fighting at half time so it wasn't completely random (tho completely disgusting). And I wouldn't have the issue with the FA if the treatment was the same across the board...again Defoe got no ban, the ref saw the incident, so i understand why the 3 match ban for violent conduct couldnt be given, but no reason the extra 7 game punishment couldn't be.

I'm at work now too so will catch up later, just want to reiterate I am not defending him, i just think the FA is a joke

Wishfulmakeupping Thu 25-Apr-13 08:58:42

Very OTT in my opinion and quite damaging too as the message seems to be that biting is worse than racism?!
There is no consistency in the game, it's so variable match to match and offense to offense. Sadly a lot depends on who the player is- I'm not saying that Suarez shouldn't have got 10 match ban but it has to be the same no matter who the player is and agree there's no way it would have happened to a Man U player.
It's seems the FA is gunning for Suarez at the Minute shame they can't focus their attention to serious issues in the game ie increase in football violence between fans or the corruption at Blackburn Rovers but the FA has a knack of ignoring the real issues

FortyFacedFuckers Thu 25-Apr-13 09:00:23

As a mum who has a football obsessed boy if he's not playing he's watching it, I think it's an absolute disgrace and I don't think a ten game ban is anywhere near enough. if my child had bit someone during a game I'm sure he would rightly be dropped from his club without a second thought but this "adult" keeps on getting away with it.

youlooklikeaclown Thu 25-Apr-13 09:37:51

He should watch this on a repeated loop -

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 11:02:32

"The racism thing" well that appeared to not be very clear cut. Suarez said "negrito" not "negro" which isnt a racist term. Sounds like Evra was a prized twat as well

Oh please. That argument is a bit like saying 'If I call you a 'black bastard' I'm not being racist because saying 'black' is not offensive. Suarez claimed he 'only' said 'negrito'. There was actually no call to refer to Evra's race at all, but Suarez kept doing it throughout the game. And why use a diminutive to a grown man, except to belittle him? Suarez says where he comes from it is common usage and not offensive, but not a single black Uruguyan popped up to agree with him, I notice.

He is lucky Ivanovic did not want to press charges, or he would have been prosecuted. 10 matches is a lot, but it is based on his appalling record as well as the incident itself.

mayorquimby Thu 25-Apr-13 11:51:09

""The racism thing" well that appeared to not be very clear cut. Suarez said "negrito" not "negro" which isnt a racist term. Sounds like Evra was a prized twat as well. "

The term Negrito was never used.
He used the term negro (neh-gro in Spanish as opposed to the English knee-grow)

mayorquimby Thu 25-Apr-13 11:54:31

Fwiw I think anywhere in the 6-10 game mark is about right, 10 seems on the harsh side but not unjustifiably so.
I know people say you get less for shocking tackles and punches which cause far more damage than what Suarez did, but biting an opponent is so out of the norm and not something why opponent expects to be subject to that I can see why the fa have come down like a ton of bricks on him

Tanith Thu 25-Apr-13 12:01:59

I must admit, when I saw it, I involuntarily told the TV screen:

"No! We don't bite: biting hurts!"

Then saw the incredulous faces of my DH and DS blush

MrsClown1 Thu 25-Apr-13 12:09:55

I cant believe people actually think this ban is excessive. How the hell do they expect fans to behave when they are allowing footballers to get away with that kind of behavior. I have a son who (thank God) has never been interested in football. However, my next door neighbours son used to be in a Sunday morning village team. I am positive that if he had bitten someone it would have been his last match. These footballers are overpaid twats who think they are above the law. If I went out on to the street and got into an altercation with someone and bit them do you think the police would get involved? Too right they would.

I would like to ask the posters who see this ban as an excessive a question: Would you allow your child/partner etc to behave like that if they played football?

My ex DH (who has always been a football fan) no longer watches men's football - he watches women's football because he says they play it like the game it is. The money involved in male football makes me sick and I cant stand the game. Well, correction I dont mind the game its the ethos of it that gets me.

As far as the racism thing goes - if I racially abused a colleague at work I would be sacked - no questions asked.

indyandlara Thu 25-Apr-13 12:10:32

What do footballers actually have to do before they are properly held to account and society sees some of them for what they actually are? Rape? Drunk driving? Racism? Violent conduct? Oh yeah, I forgot. We can always make excuses for those. When there finally is a culture in football where people are held to account properly for their actions and when gay players feel they can safely come out then I might have some time for it. Guess it'll be a long wait.

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 12:29:55

I don't think anyone is saying he shouldn't be punished, I'm certainly not. I'm unhappy that all footballers don't receive the same punishments for the same crimes...that why I feel the ban is excessive, see Defoe for example.

Flobbadobs Thu 25-Apr-13 12:38:59

It won't be 10 matches. Liverpool will appeal and it will get dropped to around 4/5.
Funnily enough my DS played on Saturday, he managed to get through a whole match without biting someone. He's 12. Suarez is a moron.

HesterShaw Thu 25-Apr-13 12:43:21

Surely biting is GBH.

He should be arrested and charged.

A grown man biting another? Contemptible.

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 12:48:12

I think it depends who you listen to wrt to the racism accusations tbh. You ask your average LFC fan and you can bet your life they have a totally different take on the whole shitty affair than a Man Utd fan. In much the same way a Chelsea fan would think John Terry is god while the rest of the world knows his a scuzzy rat.

As for the biting I'd say a 10 match ban was fair ONLY if it was guaranteed that if another player for another team got the same punishment for doing the same thing. But that is not the case. The FA are arseholes in that respect. I think its laughable that anyone thinks he deserves a whole life ban confused as for LFC giving him the boot they might not get a choice. If I was him I wouldnt want to play english football at all anymore. Far too many blatant double standards and favourtism going on.

HesterShaw Thu 25-Apr-13 12:49:43

Maybe there's no precedent, because not even footballers are generally big enough dickheads to BITE ANOTHER PERSON ffs.

He should be chucked out of the club.

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 12:50:12

*"I must admit, when I saw it, I involuntarily told the TV screen:

"No! We don't bite: biting hurts!"

Then saw the incredulous faces of my DH and DS"*

this made me grin

HesterShaw Thu 25-Apr-13 12:51:09


See? Only toddlers bite. Is this man a toddler? Well he might be mentally, but otherwise he is a grown man.

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 12:56:36

Funnily enough Hester i did say to my DP about the whole thing that I didnt know they allowed toddlers to play in the Premier League hmm grin

It's not the fact he's been punished for it that irks me its that they seem to come down hard on Suarez than if another player had done this. That I find unfair.

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 12:57:20

I think it depends who you listen to wrt to the racism accusations tbh

No, I think it depends what the findings of the FA were. And they potted him for 8 matches. Evra is no hero (remember his fight with the Cheslsea groundsman?) but I see no cause to think Suarez suffered any kind of injustice over that one.

Tiredmumno1 Thu 25-Apr-13 13:00:59

I have to agree with some of the posters who are saying the FA have it in for him, as there wouldn't be such an uproar if players that do similar things get punished the same, taking two examples into consideration - the racism row, Terry gets a 4 match ban, Suarez an 8 match ban (how can this differ so much) and Defoe bit Mascherano and got off scott free where as Suarez gets a ban of 10 games.

The FA need to treat every player the same, not make up punishments that are different for different players.

Yes what he did was WRONG I don't think anyone is disputing that fact, it's more about the way it's handled.

FWIW I have no idea what punishment I would have handed him if it were me, but taking into account that Defoe did the same thing and nothing happened then it is actually quite a hard decision to make, the FA obviously didn't look at it like that though.

mayorquimby Thu 25-Apr-13 13:10:15

"FWIW I have no idea what punishment I would have handed him if it were me, but taking into account that Defoe did the same thing and nothing happened then it is actually quite a hard decision to make, the FA obviously didn't look at it like that though."

The fa's hands were tied by their own rules regarding matters dealt with on the pitch by the referee. As Defoe had been booked it was deemed to have been dealt with on the pitch and as such not subject to their review.
This issue was not at play in this case because the referee missed the incident.

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 13:14:18

Terry made one racist statement. Suarez hounded Evra with racist statements for extended parts of a match. So a bit different (I say that through gritted teeth, given how much I dislike John Terry).

PrincessFiorimonde Thu 25-Apr-13 13:27:59

I think Suarez behaved like a prick. But I also see the point that a footballer who's broken another player's leg might have got a lesser punishment. FA decisions can be inconsistent.

Also, although I love rugby, it's undoubtedly true that its players do sometimes inflict injuries. Anyone else remember Philip de Glanville nearly losing an eye in the 90s? I'm not sure if anyone got done for that.

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 13:41:45

Thinking about it, Suarez aside the FA are inconsistant when dolling out punishments.

I don't think Suarez was "hounding" Evra I think they were as bad as each other. I doubt Evra used the MN mantra "did you mean to be so rude?" I bet he said a few choice things to Suarez.

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 13:48:39

Why are you guessing what Evra might have done, in the absence of any claim by Suarez? If Evra had racially abused him back, I expect Suarez just might have mentioned it at his FA disciplinary hearing.

MrsClown1 Thu 25-Apr-13 13:51:56

I remember when my son was little he was in a play area - as he was climbing up a ladder another child crept up behind him and bit him right on the backside. The supervisor in the play area was fuming and barred the other child from the play area and he was only 3! My child also got bitten in a shoppers creche (actually drew blood) and the parents of the child who did it was asked not to take their child to the creche again!

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 14:02:22

"Why are you guessing what Evra might have done, in the absence of any claim by Suarez? If Evra had racially abused him back, I expect Suarez just might have mentioned it at his FA disciplinary hearing."

erm... I'm not hmm merely pointing out that "hounding someone" would be like relentlessly picking on them while they felt unable to defend themselves. All I said was I doubt Evra just put on a shocked and appalled expression and spouted that silly line. I thought that was obvious what I saying lol?!

I guess the local love of LFC as well as my DPs passion for the club is rubbing off on me grin coz while I agree Suarez was bang out of order biting someone I still fail to see Evra as a totally innocent party.

shellshock7 Thu 25-Apr-13 14:02:32

mayorquimby the FA couldn't give Defoe the usual 3 match ban for violent conduct as the ref had booked him...but they could give him the additional 7 match ban they have given Suarez. Suarez was given an 8 match ban for racism when this was already in the refs report of the game so it is double standards.

Ban biters for 10 games yes, but only if you are goin to ban them all.

melika Thu 25-Apr-13 14:05:45

I'm sure if they 'investigate' it properly they would find him innocent just like that incident with John Terry?

Seriously though, he deserved it, the twat!

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 14:07:20

Oh, don't get me wrong, Evra is Man U's foremost aggro magnet du jour, which is saying something. I am also a Liverpool fan, as is DH.

But in my view it is really minimising and even excusing racism to try and start saying, 'Oh diddums, someone called you negro, whatever.'

We really don't have to take that shit anymore.

DesperatelySeekingSedatives Thu 25-Apr-13 14:25:22

Oh god no, racism is inexcusable and Suarez was found guilty and punished as he should have been. I'm just flummoxed as to why they seem to come down hard on some players and not on others for the same/ similar offences. That pisses me off no end. I'm sure it does other people.

mayorquimby Thu 25-Apr-13 14:27:48

I don't think Suarez was "hounding" Evra I think they were as bad as each other. I doubt Evra used the MN mantra "did you mean to be so rude?" I bet he said a few choice things to Suarez."

The repeated nature or Suarez remarks was listed as an aggravating factor in determining his ban.
In that respect it was treated in the same manner as terry. 4 games for the initial offence, doubled in Suarez' case for the fact that he committed the same offence on more than one occasion.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 15:04:37

It seems that one of the reasons for disagreement between posters here is that some believe that calling someone a racist name is worse than physical violence and therefore should be punished more harshly. I'm not in that camp.

It has been suggested by a couple of football people that the reason why the ref didn't book Suarez at the time could be because he knew that a sending off would only result in a three match suspension. There's no reason to believe that this was the reason but it's an interesting thought.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 15:08:00

No reason to believe it was the reason? Argh. I need a break, sorry about that abuse of the English language. smile

Cherriesarelovely Thu 25-Apr-13 15:10:15

Amazed at the reaction of some pundits to this punishment. We were just saying at school that some of our pupils who struggle to control their behaviour see this sort of example and think it is ok to bite and thump others....a famous footballer does it so why not! Biting someone else in a temper? As an adult? Come on....!!!

SpanishFly Thu 25-Apr-13 15:19:21

If I bit someone at work, in full view of people, I would be sacked on the spot.

StealthOfficialCrispTester Thu 25-Apr-13 15:21:15

So glad to read this thread. Grown men behaving like naughty toddlers and whining when they get pulled up on it.

iloveweetos Thu 25-Apr-13 16:22:03

i think its disgusting that he still has a career!!! Racism and assault? any other career, you would be screwed!!!! but footballers seem to be above this!

EldritchCleavage Thu 25-Apr-13 17:21:50

It seems that one of the reasons for disagreement between posters here is that some believe that calling someone a racist name is worse than physical violence and therefore should be punished more harshly. I'm not in that camp.

I don't think it is worse necessarily. Depends on the fact of the case. I don't think anyone has said that on this thread, actually.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 17:27:39

They did, EldritchCleavage. As in this comment from a poster earlier today, "Very OTT in my opinion and quite damaging too as the message seems to be that biting is worse than racism?!"

dollywobbles Thu 25-Apr-13 17:28:44

If you read the transcript of the Suarez/Evra FA hearing, you'll see that the FA state that they don't actually believe Suarez is racist.

TSO Thu 25-Apr-13 17:35:20

"If you read the transcript of the Suarez/Evra FA hearing, you'll see that the FA state that they don't actually believe Suarez is racist."

Talking of the FA and double standards - an English court of law said that about John Terry and found him not guilty but the FA decided he was and punished him anyway. wink

Personally I think the FA needs to be answerable to someone other than itself, that it needs to be impartial and to be seen to be so and it needs to address a whole rack of problems within its structure, within its rules and within its capacity to change those rules at the drop of a hat to suit its own agenda.

It's not going to happen though.

JamieandtheMagicTorch Thu 25-Apr-13 17:39:46

I can't get over the fact of a grown man biting. To be it is extremely disturbed behaviour - primitive.

The only other people wont to biting are toddlers, and AFAIK sexual psychopaths.

Very strange and disturbing

JamieandtheMagicTorch Thu 25-Apr-13 17:40:05

To me

dollywobbles Thu 25-Apr-13 17:44:19

I don't think the FA said that Terry is racist either, to be fair.
I think they found him guilty of using racist language - which he didn't deny. He says he was saying it as a question, as in 'you think I called you a ......?'
The criminal charge was a different thing altogether.

JamieandtheMagicTorch Thu 25-Apr-13 17:44:25

Totally agree with MrsClown

But to lisiten to the pundits' mealy mouthed condemnation it seems to come down to one thing - anything is excuseable in foootball because it is big business.

pissovski Thu 25-Apr-13 17:44:31

Suarez is an idiot, and there is no defence for what he did.

However, like PPs have said, i find the inconsistency of the FA galling. They are saying that the Defoe/Mascherano incident was dealt with by the referee, hence no ban. Ivanovic showed the referee the bite from Suarez, and the ref took no action. Now either the ref decided no action was needed, or he decided to take no action (so the FA would have to take action retrospectively).

Also the FA would appear to be saying that biting someone is twice as bad as than lunging in with a tackle that prematurely ends a player's career (Roy Keane on Alfie Inge Haarland - a 5 match ban)

mayorquimby Thu 25-Apr-13 17:58:37

"Ivanovic showed the referee the bite from Suarez, and the ref took no action. Now either the ref decided no action was needed, or he decided to take no action (so the FA would have to take action retrospectively)."

Or more logically the referee didn't see the incident and can't send Suarez off on the basis of Ivanovics word and showing him some marks that he has no way of knowing if they were inflicted by Suarez.

"Also the FA would appear to be saying that biting someone is twice as bad as than lunging in with a tackle that prematurely ends a player's career (Roy Keane on Alfie Inge Haarland - a 5 match ban)"

Well to be fair Keane got an 8 game ban if you're judging it by Suarez. 3 for the red for violent conduct and and addditional 5 following the FA inquiry. If you're going to exclude the 3 games for the red card from Keanes then surely you have to do the same for Suarez?
It's also debatable whether it ended his career but either way it was a disgusting tackle that had the potential to end anyones career.

Faxthatpam Thu 25-Apr-13 18:05:14

The thing that shocked me about that bite was the length of it... he bit him and then held on and shook him - as my DS said "like a rabid dog". Frankly it was disturbing to watch.

He needs serious help to see this is not acceptable behaviour - anywhere, but especially during a football match in front of millions of viewers, including very impressionable children.

I think the ban reflects the fact that its a disgusting thing for a grown man to do. He has done it before and received a 7 match ban that time, so 10 matches for a repeat offence seems right to me, even lenient.

I agree the FA needs to look at its rules and inconsistencies, the Defoe incident being a case in point (although he had no previous - unlike Suarez). However, the whole 'picking on Suarez' argument is nonsense. LFC fans are bound to say this. The fact remains he behaved like an animal, had done it before and was very lucky Ivanovitch didn't want to press charges. IMO.

HesterShaw Thu 25-Apr-13 18:07:03

I think he must be mentally ill if he's been banned for it before.

Faxthatpam Thu 25-Apr-13 18:10:53

I think he definitely needs help of some kind, before going back on the pitch.

AuntieMaggie Thu 25-Apr-13 18:11:03

Not harsh enough imo. As others have said if they'd have done it at work they'd have been sacked, if a child did this in school there'd be consequences, if a person did this to another in public there'd be consequences and in fact if most celebrities did this they'd probably be charged with something. If a woman had come on here saying her husband had done this then it wouldn't be acceptable so just because it happens during sport it shouldn't be any different regardless of whether it left a mark.

The whole way he did it (grabbing his arm) unnerves me.

AnyFucker Thu 25-Apr-13 18:40:33

If it didn't "leave a mark" the only reason is because he chose to bite a man strong enough to wrench his head away from his arm

I pity Suarez' gf or wife and children

A man that will do this in the gaze of the public is capable of anything

toomuchtoask Thu 25-Apr-13 18:44:46

I can't think of another job where you could bite someone or shout racial abuse at someone and still keep your job. They need to really sort out the world of football. A small few really give the game a bad name.

andubelievedthat Thu 25-Apr-13 18:50:36

paid time off? the top players get >above their salary ,a bonus for "coming off the bench">onto the pitch ! a bonus for every goal they score ,some get "turned up for training " bonus, the car ?usually given to him (good rap ,apparently?)it is not their "sign on fee," that"s just the beginning ,oh, and once their "agent" has negotiated the transfer fee , the club will pay any costs the agent throws at them, entirely ,and any the player may have ,and any other costs ,have to move home? ,club pays(he"s worth it), wag needs a new wardrobe? club picks up tab (shes worth it?)read ,if u wish A.sugars book re when he was a football club owner , now there is a guy who loathes agents!the above is a sample only ,there is a lot more,those guys cannot be sacked .would you ? after spending so much on a player >Q contrite speech to camera.

Loulybelle Thu 25-Apr-13 18:51:41

Wasnt enough IMO, Rio Ferdinand missed 8 month for missing a drugs test, so biting someone should mean an assault charge. And his manager whining, "He hasnt let us down", nice role model for youngsters.

Blu Thu 25-Apr-13 19:08:11

I'm not a football expert or fan. But if a member if my staff bit someone from a rival company I would sack them straight away.

Rough games are games not violence because if an agreement to abide by rules. That's the basis of bring sporting. Biting people sets up the possibility of intimidating other players or making them reluctant to engage in close tackles. I know footballers often try and use a tackle for a sneaky kick, all deliberate violence should be treated exactly as that not as part if the game.

If it's harsh compared with other offences then the others are wrong. I wouldn't pay money for my son to go and watch him.

Blu Thu 25-Apr-13 19:14:25

Is there evidence that it did not leave a mark? From the footage the bite was sustained, the other guy looked shocked. The previous bite left a red raw weal and bruise.

AnyFucker Thu 25-Apr-13 19:33:15

Some halfwit upthread said "it didn't leave a mark" and that was supposed to make it ok

I have no idea if it left a mark or not, but I do know that particular "argument" misses the point by a country mile

iloveweetos Thu 25-Apr-13 19:33:41

It shouldn't matter if a mark was left, he bit another player. It's just all a joke!

AuntieMaggie Thu 25-Apr-13 21:31:02

faxthatpam i agree that it was disturbing to watch and it was the whole way he did it as imo its not a usual reactive way to "hit out".

Maryz Thu 25-Apr-13 22:27:24

I don't care whether it left a mark. In fact, I don't really care if he had missed the player and only bitten his jersey.

The point is that it simply shouldn't occur to an adult to bite someone.

The fact that he has now been caught doing this twice means that he obviously thinks it's in some way acceptable [baffled]

JamieandtheMagicTorch Thu 25-Apr-13 22:28:43


yy. It's the fact that it even occurred to him. Disturbing

EldritchCleavage Fri 26-Apr-13 10:04:24

There is a similarity between the Evra incident and the Ivanovic one: both Evra and Ivanovic were players who were doing a good job (legitimately and within the rules) of marking Suarez and making it more difficult for him to play his game. He doesn't seem able to cope with that. Anyone who closes him down risks some kind of violent or aggressive reaction. And since that happens routinely in football, these incidents are going to happen again.

I don't believe Suarez has learned anything-in the moment, he has such poor insight and impulse control that he just acts out in a disturbing way. Liverpool are going to have to think about that very carefully, since they seem to have decided to keep him for the time being.

The previous biting incident in the Netherlands is a different level of seriousness, I think. Play had stopped, there was a bit of handbags Suarez wasn't even involved in, then he calmly walked up to another player (who wasn't doing anything much) and bit him from behind, breaking the skin. Completely disturbing.

SarahAndFuck Fri 26-Apr-13 13:25:50

In the clip I just watched, he seems to be laughing and smiling as the other player is lead away. He looks like he found it funny.

He certainly doesn't look like he is sorry or regrets what he did. And the bite itself is horrifically nasty, like a dog locking it's jaw and ratting something to cause maximum damage.

I don't watch football or support a team. I wouldn't know who he was if I met him.

But if he has done this before and a seven match ban wasn't enough to stop him doing it again, ten matches doesn't seem long enough to me.

WhitesandsofLuskentyre Fri 26-Apr-13 13:56:10

Do we have to have this guy on a football pitch any more? Can't he just be handed a lifetime ban for repeated offences of conduct unbecoming or whatever they call it?

sudaname Fri 26-Apr-13 14:09:42

Yes agree AF and if you watch the footage of it thats been shown several times in slow motion you see the other player scream in shock and pain right at the second Suarez sinks his teeth into his arm and he isn't even looking at Suarez. If that wasn't a real good old bite l expect to see the other player at the Oscars.

As for managers press conference it actually had me raging at the telly. It was all about Suarez being the victim here confused. Also he said we are just being good employers looking after our employee which any good employer would if somebody had a problem or made a mistake at work and obviously needed help.
Yeah right - like if we all go into work tomo and all randomly bite a colleague because they push in at the photocopier or whatever, let's see how many of us still have a job this time next week shall we ?

I am somewhat bemused by all the 'it's too harsh' reactions (both here and elsewhere). Seriously? A grown man committed an unprovoked attack on another in the workplace. And he is known to have done it before. I cannot understand why this is not a police matter.

It is particularly shocking because the it is so deliberate. For all people point out about career-ending tackles, these happen in the course of the game when it could be argued that the perpetrator has been neglectful/careless of the victim rather than targetting them; you can't say that about walking up to someone and sinking your teeth in!

DreamingofSummer Fri 26-Apr-13 15:03:47

He's chewed it over and decided not to appeal

Lovecat Fri 26-Apr-13 16:12:24

Lifelong Liverpool fan here and I am disgusted with my club for trying to defend the violent wanker. He should be chucked out and banned from playing football.

As for those saying 'well, racists got less of a ban', the answer is to get rid of them as well imho, not lessen the punishment of a bloody nutter.

SarahAndFuck Sat 27-Apr-13 10:28:12

I have to agree with WhereYouLeftIt and Lovecat and others.

Racism should be punished by a lifetime ban as well.

But rather than get into an argument about is racism worse than physically attacking your colleagues on a regular basis, we should be agreeing that both are wrong and deserve the same punishment.

The problem being that a verbal attack that includes racist language is sometimes more difficult to prove than a physical attack that was caught on camera with the victim shouting in pain and left teeth marks in his arm. He had the physical proof to show them and that will always make punishing the attacker easier because they can't argue that they bit someone by accident or that the bite was misinterpreted.

WellJustCallHimDave Sat 27-Apr-13 10:57:36

It's unfortunate for the easy-going Branislav Ivanovic that he was the CB that day. Had the alternative CB been fielded the assault wouldn't have happened. Suarez simply wouldn't have dared!

Join the discussion

Join the discussion

Registering is free, easy, and means you can join in the discussion, get discounts, win prizes and lots more.

Register now