Suarez bites another player!

Is it both 9 games and 4 months? I thought the 4 months meant he'd just miss 9 games and that was being reported.

 

Do FIFA have jurisdiction over club football? Can they even ban him for playing for Liverpool..or Madrid or whoever?

 

9 international games Simms. 4 months from all kind of football activity.

 

Ok thanks.

What does football activity mean? Can he still train at liverpool? Or does it basically mean no friendlies or reserve games or travelling with the first team to matches?

 

Could be harsher, but it is a significant curtailment of his international career. Liverpool just have to make plans for Saurez to join them about a quarter of the way into each season, depending on the extent of his annual mental lapses. They could almost reach prior agreements with the footballing authorities in anticipation of his inevitable offences.

 

No football related activity Simms, nothing.

I wonder if that includes transfers..

He'll miss the rest of the WC, and he'll miss the Copa America.

Also, even if he appeals the punishment, he still can't play in the meantime.

 

Good question.
I read it included a stadium ban.. but what level of stadiums would that be?
My guess is that he will only be allowed to train and nothing else.

 

I think even team training might be out for him, but difficult to enforce. Although the media will be keeping a close eye on him!

 

So he's back mid October, fresh and ready to bang in 20 goals for Liverpool.

 

All of that. He's not even allowed to watch football on TV.

 

Fair enough ban in my eyes. People calling for a 2 year ban are ludicrous

 

I'd have gone for teeth removal, that way he could gum as many people as he liked. Some might actually like it....

 

Yeah you could be right, it could be like having a new signing for them, refreshed and raring to go.

I feel a bit sorry for BR actually. He really seemed to have got Suarez back on track. Imagine how we'd feel if one of our players did something wrong while playing for their country and were banned from playing for us.

Do you think Liverpool may just cash in on him now, especially with Barca and Real waiting in the wings?

 

I think he's finished at Liverpool. I've read his lawyer saying that the English and Italians are out to get him, creating a witch hunt.

It beggars belief that he blames everyone else, apart from himself. Doesn't not take responsibility for his own actions and is always the victim.

Didn't he say just before the WC he's a changed man, and he'll never do that type of thing again......:dismay:

Seeing as it's his third offence of biting an opponent, on the big stage of a World Cup of all places, he's got quite a light punishment.

 

Not even the Glory Hornet Boys??? That's punishment enough :dismay:

 

How is this a 'fair enough ban'?

He was banned for the first 10 games of last season due to the 2ND bite of his career. He bites again and is banned for 9 games?

The fact that international games come far less frequently than club games are irrelevant. I'm not saying this is what you think, I just want to make it clear to all. Suarez is a third time offender, is 1 less game really enough? Of course not.

A 15+ game ban is far more fitting for something like this, but yet again FIFA have shown themselves up. I can't say I'm surprised unfortunately.

One more thing.. The 4 month ban.. is that from now?

 

It's a 4 month ban from all football. That means he can't play for Liverpool until the end of October. Not sure exactly how many matches that involves but it's PL and CL..must be about 15 domestic matches I think. Add the World Cup and any other Uruguay games in that time and it's nearer 20 matches.

Seems a shame 1 of the 4 months will be July when there are hardly any games anyway.

 

The 9 game ban is for international games by the way, so hopefully Uruguay get knocked out by Colombia, then he'll miss Uruguay games for about 18 months.

 

Second bite at the cherry?

 

Do friendlies count? Can't they just arrange a number of meaningless games during international breaks against the likes of Panama, Bolivia etc

 

He will miss 9 league games for Liverpool, 3 Champions League group games and a League cup game (which he probably wouldn't have played in). Newcastle on 1st November would be his first game back.

 

Not good enough. Should have been banned for the rest of 2014, the little pr*ck.

 

Suarez Subbuteo..




[video=youtube;yigZPwjf5L4]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=yigZPwjf5L4[/video]

 

I'm very surprised that FIFA didn't hand him a suspended lifetime ban in addition to his 4 month punishment. After all, banning him didn't make much of a difference last time. Perhaps having a total career-ending sentance hanging over him would make him think twice before biting someone again.

 

The ban seems fair to me. There's plenty of potentially leg breaking tackles that can do far more damage that get less of a punishment

 

This type of argument misses the point. Gobbing a mouthful of phlegm in someone's face will do no physical damage whatever, but it's utterly disgusting and inhuman behaviour. Biting is in the same bracket and needs to be treated as such.

 

Agreed.

Bad tackles are the poor execution of a legal activity on the pitch.

Biting is neither remotely legal nor necessary. There is no justification for it and it's nothing less than a deliberate intent to hurt an opposition player.

 

You make a fair point, but I'd still rather get bitten on the shoulder by a slightly bonkers Suarez, than get a broken leg. Doubly so if I played footy for a living.

Also I wasn't talking about bad tackles, I meant deliberately nasty tackles, of which there are many.

 

Can handle the ban length, but as others have said, without a suspended ban attached and without forcing him to get help for his obvious issues, it's a little bit weak.

 

He has got off lightly, AGAIN :dismay:

 

Don't think friendlies count

 

I agree, mostly, but don't you think that there are many bad tackles that are not just poor execution, but genuine attempts to hurt or stop the player with trip, kick or lunge - any of which could cause a serious injury. I broke a bone in my foot when I was player from the slightest of contact from a "professional foul" trip, it was my awkward landing when trying to stay on my feet that broke it.

When Roy Keene's smashed Haaland' knee he only received a 3 match ban. He then boasted about it in his book as being an act of "vengeance", and then was given another 5 matches. Haaland was out for a year and was never the same player again. I've just tried to share the youtube video of that tackle on here. But my ipad isn't able. Now that was a bad tackle, not poor execution.

Yes, a bite is intended to hurt, but hardly a serious physical threat like a kick or trip is.

I think Suarez's punishment is reasonable.

 

It's not so much the actual physical harm biting can cause as opposed to a bad tackle, it's the fact that biting or spitting at someone is not only totally alien to the game, but to life in general; whereas a tackle, be it bad or not, is at least part and parcel of the game.

Having said that, a deliberate malicious tackle, such as the one Roy Keane admitted to in his afore mentioned book, has no place in the game either and should be treated as seriously as the likes of Biting, spitting etc.

 

I agree with that. Keane went out with the intention of causing injury and succeeded which is as bad as the intention to bite. I'm not saying one is worse than the other but a 9 match ban, and 4 month total ban is quite substantial. It will affect Liverpools champions league ambitions that's for sure.

 

Yes, biting is a disgusting act. But if I was depending on football for my living, I'd rather be spat at or bitten on the arm than receive a potential leg braking ( and career threatening) tackle.

Just saying.