Active discussions

Meet the Other Phone. A phone that grows with your child.

Meet the Other Phone.
A phone that grows with your child.

Buy now

Please or to access all these features

Talk
AIBU?

Share your dilemmas and get honest opinions from other Mumsnetters.

Original poster

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

117 replies

CoolCadbury · 24/04/2013 22:35

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.

OP posts:
DesperatelySeekingSedatives · 25/04/2013 14:25

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 · 25/04/2013 14:27

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 · 25/04/2013 15:04

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 · 25/04/2013 15:08

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

Cherriesarelovely · 25/04/2013 15:10

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 · 25/04/2013 15:19

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

StealthOfficialCrispTester · 25/04/2013 15:21

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

iloveweetos · 25/04/2013 16:22

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 · 25/04/2013 17:21

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 · 25/04/2013 17:27

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 · 25/04/2013 17:28

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 · 25/04/2013 17:35

"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 · 25/04/2013 17:39

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 · 25/04/2013 17:40

To me

dollywobbles · 25/04/2013 17:44

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 · 25/04/2013 17:44

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 · 25/04/2013 17:44

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 · 25/04/2013 17:58

"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 · 25/04/2013 18:05

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 · 25/04/2013 18:07

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

Faxthatpam · 25/04/2013 18:10

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

AuntieMaggie · 25/04/2013 18:11

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 · 25/04/2013 18:40

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 · 25/04/2013 18:44

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 · 25/04/2013 18:50

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.