2014 World Cup

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Part of the Suarez offence was the pathetic effort to "simulate" some sort of aggressive action by Chiellini. That in its own right should warrant a 3 game ban.

---

Doesn't that regrettably go with the territory these days? Commit a bad foul and then pretend you're injured in the hope to avoid the referee's retribution.

On a separate issue, the referees have been quite lenient in this tournament with cards especially for tug backs where it used to be an automatic yellow. I think that has been an improvement. However, where the game is getting out of hand is the automatic feigning of injury for 90% of tackles. The having to leave the pitch following treatment was an attempt to reduce this but now players are rolling around and then telling the trainer not to come on. How to deal with this? It is gone beyond a joke.

Doesn't that regrettably go with the territory? :)

I actually think that while FIFA has good reason to scrutinise an offence they also then have freedom to look at the pretending, so have every reason to add this on.

Wrt the feigning injury I honestly haven't been conscious of such a high percentage of pretend injuries. I often think people underestimate how sore a bone on bone knock is. Only last night I was rolling around in agony having walked into a stool in my living room having just turned the lights off to go to bed. Wood straight into the middle of my shin. Even Mrs Stuttgart ( she says hi) came down to check if I was ok I was moaning so much.

Interesting start to Argentina v Nigeria. More action already than in England's game yesterday.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by OwlsFan

Why is a relatively harmless bite far worse than someone going over the top of the ball trying to do serious injury to someone?

---

if you bit another player in the leinster senior league once you would get a year ban no doubt. appear in front of the LSL committee for the same offence a third time and it would be lifetime ban. why should a highly paid "professional" playing in front of millions be treated more leniently than that?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by NeverFeltBetter

He's had seven and ten game bans already. They shouldn't go the other direction.

---

Good point!

They were talking about a two year, twenty-four game minimum, ban earlier. A tad OTT, but more in favour than against.

But a few people have made the point about, er, previous 'hatchet-men' (a certain Corkonian springs to mind, but there were many others far worse!!) who caused career-threatening or -ending injuries...

Not too much recrimination for most of them.
Even players throwing punches or head-butts eg. Duncan Ferguson, prefer more lenient teatment?

I have people (mainly Liverpool fans) trying to justify Suarez by saying Cantona was still loved by United fans, Terry still loved by Chelsea fans after the racist issue etc....

Suarez has bitten a player 3 feckin times on top of being a racist! Who actually bites someone! I still cant get my head around it, I seen the Ajax one again yesterday and its actually freaky to watch, he leans in during an argument and bites the guy in the neck. Any normal person if they lose the head completely might swing a punch or throw a headbutt.

With the one yesterday there wasnt even a scuffle between them, Chiellini had his back turned and for some reason Suarez go to act when hes frustrated is to lean in and bites for no apparent reason.

What makes it all the worse is the absolute arrogance of the guy honestly believing that he is innocent and its all a conspiracy against him. Any ban should be right across all football and not just international. 6 months should be the minimum with the warning that if it happens again its a lifetime ban

In agreement with Razors left peg on this one. 6 months should be minimum for this. It's absolutely insane and mind-boggling to see people genuinely defending such actions. I understand club loyalty and all that jazz, but the man is getting away with this over and over again. He should be given a hefty fine and a 6 month ban.

Good points by Razor.

On the UK phone ins this morning Liverpool fans were saying that he has damaged the image of the club and he has let the club down. Many would be happy to see him go now.

Good article on thescore.ie basically saying that Suarez needs a lengthy ban to save himself from himself as his teammates, managers and advisors are enabling his behaviour by supporting / refusing to condone it. He is a "piece of meat" that many people have a financial or other vested interest in so they will continue to be soft on him. In this environment it's no wonder he believes he's a victim. That's why the authorities need to be hard.


My mate from Liverpool says he lives in a private gated development almost exclusively inhabited by a motley crew of advisors and agents and other hangers on.

I hate that this is taking away from the WC. Pure WC talk at this stage imo.

I missed today's games because I had been up since 4am. What was the sca?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Stuttgart88

Or possibly the act of a total toe rag with self control issues.

---

He's certainly got psychological problems that might be aided by the seeking of some psychiatric treatment. I think the reason this incident in particular has sparked such an hysterical response is because of how biting is viewed by society at large. (I'm assuming the incident is receiving the same level of exposure around the world as it is here in the UK, where Suarez, the man who knocked England out, also plays his club football.) Biting is very much taboo and, as has been mentioned, is deemed unmanly, primitive and subhuman. Human adults aren't expected to bite; arguing, punching and kicking one another is what "normal" humans are supposed to do. People can celebrate and pay money to enjoy Mike Tyson beating the sh*te out of Evander Holyfield, but when Tyson takes a bite out of his opponent's ear, they're utterly repulsed. If there was an etiquette of violence, biting would surely fall foul of it. See Razors' comment above, for example: "Any normal person if they lose the head completely might swing a punch or throw a headbutt." I wouldn't dare cast judgment upon the casting of judgment or anything - :p - but is there moral consistency in treating the relatively-harmless bite more harshly than the utterly appalling headbutt? I won't be a biting apologist, but the moral revolt just seems odd and arbitrary to me.

I thought Dunphy's response to which Bonnie linked was measured and on the money. It was good to see given the media's over-the-top outrage. Adrian Chile's comment to break analysis of England-Costa Rica yesterday was cretinous: "It's only right to report this. It's nearly a news matter now!" For all his faults and groundless opinions, Dunphy's a good man at heart. Well, compared to that Chiles anyway!

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by osarusan

Robbie Savage will be all too familiar with that.

---

Was Savage once involved in a biting incident too or was that a play on his surname that went completely over my head? :o

Anyway, as Bonnie notes, there were also some games today... It's been quite rare to see a keeper catch a shot at this World Cup. I was surprised when Enyeama caught a stinger towards the end of Argentina-Nigeria. It seemed such an unusual sight. Does the specific ball they use possibly play a role in the lack of catching and this apparent surge in punching? Adidas are always making the balls lighter and flightier. In slow-motion replays, you'll often see the ball swaying from side to side as it glides through the air. It reminds me of these from the glory days of youth down at the beach:

http://i.istockimg.com/file_thumbvie...for-soccer.jpg

Why don't they just play with them instead already?! Is punching simply something that's a lot more common for goalkeepers outside of the UK and Ireland to do then, and so we're just not used to seeing it so much maybe? Or am I imagining an increase in its prevalence?

Whatever about his impressive catch, Enyeama didn't cover himself in glory for Messi's free-kick. It was indeed a lovely free-kick, but I thought the keeper could have done better to get across the goal. Maybe some buddies of his team-mate had been in touch...

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8MjPpjkR5P4

Seeing a free-kick being coverted has been another rare sight at this World Cup, of course. Does Messi's bring the grand tally to two now then?

Group E could be interesting. Even a heavy defeat and a big Swiss win could put France out, though very unlikely.

Depending on results, Ecaudor could lose and go through or win and go out.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by BonnieShels

How in hell are BBC willingly showing Greece?

---

Their daily coverage of Wimbledon must be forcing them to cover the evening fixtures. ITV have been covering the late afternoon games.

1-0 Switzerland.

I know technically anyone can qualify and anyone can be eliminated, but realistically, it does look like France and Switzerland going through.

That said, we've had plenty of surprised and late drama so far.

Danny when I said that a normal person might swing a punch or throw a head butt, I meant it as as an instinctive reaction and those are generally what people do... I didnt mean a head butt was an ok thing to do.

But this is a case where they guy wasnt particularly in the stressful situation of a scuffle or scrap with the other guy, it was a pre meditated bite on another person whos back was turned, thats what makes it much more morally repugnant and especially that the guy is a repeat offender who thinks he does no wrong

2-0 Switzerland. Good night Honduras. One more goal for Switzerland and we're into the situation that Ecuador could win and go out.

I would love to see this WC get more mental and have this game finish 4-0 and Swiss 5-0 and send home France.

I'd settle for France to finish runners-up in the group so the play Argentina in the next round. Another top team gets knocked out, and more chance for the Costa Ricas and Colombias to reach the semis.

Ain't gonna happen though.