Biologically, a bite is more harmful than a punch or an elbow. What is Suarez has an STD as an example? Your bite infects the other person too. Humans are one of the worst living being in that we carry a lot of microbes and still survive. Now just think if he has some other serious disease (HIV for starters). I would have banned him for the whole year and docked all his pay for putting another person's life in danger. This is not his first time. Just my opinion.

@shpal- "a TOP level professional footballer, who bites people on the pitch."
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles

and that would be more normal because "these things happen"
Just because biting is unusual act of violence doesn't change the fact that's it was an act of aggression. If not, they should outline what acts of aggression will suffer heavier penalties.

Zidane was a repeat offender and never got anywhere near the punishment that Suarez has faced. So what

is it? Favoritism or significant flaw in the rules?
@Thegame - So a punch and headbutt is purely a human type of aggression? So when those male stags go head to

head for the prized female they are imitating humans? Causing harm in any form is an act of aggression so
should be punished similarly.
"when Tyson bit Evander Holyfield, but no one cared when they were punching each others heads out."
That's exactly what I don't understand. When Holyfield kept headbutting Tyson and busted open his eye, that was fine. But when Tyson bites Holyfield out of pure frustration the world lose their minds.
It's like television showing violence in day time but wouldn't dare show the act of sex. The act of creating life is taboo. The act of taking life is perfectly "normal".
There is something very wrong with that mentality.

@shpal- A player like Roy Keane had more severe "mental issues" than Suarez.

@shpal- "a TOP level professional footballer, who bites people on the pitch."
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles and that would be more normal because "these things happen"
Just because biting is unusual act of violence doesn't change the fact that's it was an act of aggression. If not, they should outline what acts of aggression will suffer heavier penalties.
Zidane was a repeat offender and never got anywhere near the punishment that Suarez has faced. So what is it? Favoritism or significant flaw in the rules?
@Thegame - So a punch and headbutt is purely a human type of aggression? So when those male stags go head to
head for the prized female they are imitating humans? Causing harm in any form is an act of aggression so should be punished similarly.
"when Tyson bit Evander Holyfield, but no one cared when they were punching each others heads out."

That's exactly what I don't understand. When Holyfield kept headbutting Tyson and busted open his eye, that was fine. But when Tyson bites Holyfield out of pure frustration the world lose their minds.

It's like television showing violence in day time but wouldn't dare show the act of sex. The act of creating life is taboo. The act of taking life is perfectly "normal".
There is something very wrong with that mentality.

@shpal- A player like Roy Keane had more severe "mental issues" than Suarez.

@shpal- "a TOP level professional footballer, who bites people on the pitch."
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles and that would be more normal because "these things happen"
Just because biting is unusual act of violence doesn't change the fact that's it was an act of aggression. If not, they should outline what acts of aggression will suffer heavier penalties.
Zidane was a repeat offender and never got anywhere near the punishment that Suarez has faced. So what is it? Favoritism or significant flaw in the rules?
@Thegame - So a punch and headbutt is purely a human type of aggression? So when those male stags go head to
head for the prized female they are imitating humans? Causing harm in any form is an act of aggression so should be punished similarly.
"when Tyson bit Evander Holyfield, but no one cared when they were punching each others heads out."
That's exactly what I don't understand. When Holyfield kept headbutting Tyson and busted open his eye, that was fine. But when Tyson bites Holyfield out of pure frustration the world lose their minds.
It's like television showing violence in day time but wouldn't dare show the act of sex. The act of creating life is taboo. The act of taking life is perfectly "normal".
There is something very wrong with that mentality.
@shpal- A player like Roy Keane had more severe "mental issues" than Suarez.

@shpal- "a TOP level professional footballer, who bites people on the pitch."
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles and that would be more normal because "these things happen"

Just because biting is unusual act of violence doesn't change the fact that's it was an act of aggression. If not, they should outline what acts of aggression will suffer heavier penalties.
Zidane was a repeat offender and never got anywhere near the punishment that Suarez has faced. So what is it? Favoritism or significant flaw in the rules?

@Thegame - So a punch and headbutt is purely a human type of aggression? So when those male stags go head to
head for the prized female they are imitating humans? Causing harm in any form is an act of aggression so should be punished similarly.

"when Tyson bit Evander Holyfield, but no one cared when they were punching each others heads out."

That's exactly what I don't understand. When Holyfield kept headbutting Tyson and busted open his eye, that was fine. But when Tyson bites Holyfield out of pure frustration the world lose their minds.
It's like television showing violence in day time but wouldn't dare show the act of sex. The act of creating life is taboo. The act of taking life is perfectly "normal".
There is something very wrong with that mentality.

@shpal- A player like Roy Keane had more severe "mental issues" than Suarez.

@shpal- "a TOP level professional footballer, who bites people on the pitch."
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles and that would be more normal because "these things happen"

Just because biting is unusual act of violence doesn't change the fact that's it was an act of aggression. If not, they should outline what acts of aggression will suffer heavier penalties.
Zidane was a repeat offender and never got anywhere near the punishment that Suarez has faced. So what is it? Favoritism or significant flaw in the rules?

@Thegame - So a punch and headbutt is purely a human type of aggression?
So when those male stags go head to head for the prized female they are imitating humans? Causing harm in any form is an act of aggression so should be punished similarly.

"when Tyson bit Evander Holyfield, but no one cared when they were punching each others heads out."

That's exactly what I don't understand. When Holyfield kept headbutting Tyson and busted open his eye, that was fine. But when Tyson bites Holyfield out of pure frustration the world lose their minds.
It's like television showing violence in day time but wouldn't dare show the act of sex. The act of creating life is taboo. The act of taking life is perfectly "normal".
There is something very wrong with that mentality.

@shpal- A player like Roy Keane had more severe "mental issues" than Suarez.

@ashwin1729, completely agree mate. @Wolfie, yea sure, why not? They are just some of our primary ways of inflicting harm when we don't possess any weapons.

"So when those male stags go head to head for the prized female they are imitating humans"

Well, they can't because humans don't have horns lol. And they are evolutionary programmed to do that.

Overall, I agree with you. That is exactly what I am trying to understand as well. You can label them all as acts of aggression, but why aren't they all treated that way? Which is why I made the point about Tyson and Holyfield. Boxing itself is an aggressive sport, but why were people shocked when Tyson bit Holyfield? Is it because biting is the epitome of unprofessionalism? Whereas punching or kicking, which is still aggressive, just a form of expressing your athleticism (reason why people watch sports)? The point I was trying to make earlier was that maybe biting someone is a no-no because you're doing it with the sole purpose and intention of causing permanent or fatal damage. Maybe its all cultural. Maybe if we were all anesthetized to all acts of violence and aggression, and put them in the same category, our species would no longer exist.

@ashwin1729, completely agree mate. @Wolfie, yea sure, why not? They are just some of our primary ways of inflicting harm when we don't possess any weapons.

"So when those male stags go head to head for the prized female they are imitating humans"

Well, they can't because humans don't have horns lol. And they are evolutionary programmed to do that.

Overall, I agree with you. That is exactly what I am trying to understand as well. You can label them all as acts of aggression, but why aren't they all treated the same way? Which is why I made the point about Tyson and Holyfield. Boxing itself is an aggressive sport, but why were people shocked when Tyson bit Holyfield? Is it because biting is the epitome of unprofessionalism? Whereas punching or kicking, which is still aggressive, just a form of expressing your athleticism (reason why people watch sports)? The point I was trying to make earlier was that maybe biting someone is a no-no because you're doing it with the sole purpose and intention of causing permanent or fatal damage. Maybe its all cultural. Maybe if we were all anesthetized to all acts of violence and aggression, and put them in the same category, our species would no longer exist.

I just wonder what would have happened if the ref showed him the red card in the game? would that have changed the 9 game ban he got, would there have even been a sanction besides the red card?

And trying no to keep the argument so fired up while at the same time exposing my thoughts on the issue... I think the main difference between an on game harsh tackle and this bite is that tackles are part of the game and most of the awful tackles are justifiable to be -not intended to harm directly- as for the bite or headbutt there is a total disposition of a player to harm the other player. It seems to me now everyone is asking for anyone who ever committed a bad foul to have the same consequences as Suarez but what he did is quite different.

how come nobody even mentioned this:

this is the reason I hate this guy with all posible hate a human can have towards a football player. Excluding people from Ghana obviously...

This imo should have had even more severe consequences than the recent incident. This act of unfair-play at its maximum expression changed the curse of a F*cking World cup! IT WAS A QUARTER FINAL MATCH!
This is why I ask what would have happened if Suarez got a red card against Italy for biting Chiellini. Or what would have FIFA done if the ref didnt send him off because of that hand ball...

overreaction over :)

Agree with @Game @ashwin @hisenburg and etc

It is the matter of what it represents. Trying to inflict harm by using teeth to another human being body . It is unthinkable , especially in the sport where every part of the body can throw some damage on another player but not teeth . This is new and It is unthinkable . When rat is cornered by cat it starts to bite and craziness appear in rats eyes and such behavior is considered like animalistic . It is very taboo act of aggression towards another human being .

So , biting is closely associated with being animal like cannibalistic behavior . Another human being biting another human into his flesh to harm is very crazy by itself in the minds of any modern day society human being .

Simple fact of putting your saliva on someone else is already disgusting , unhygienic and disrespectful .

Examples about breaking someones leg or elbowing during the match is part of the game . Most of the time it was all due to high excitement and trying to get the ball within good faith . There is a small number of players who are that evil trying to tackle someone to just break their leg or elbow them during the match to break their face .

@wolfie

Every incidents whether it is biting , elbowing , breaking leg , headbutting should be reviewed according to evidence that has been provided , severity of the inflicted harm on a player and reasons behind it .

I watched the replays and I could not find a single reason for Suarez needed to show such act of aggression .

As far Zidane watch the video .. Roma player tackled him heavily and he out of fury put his head to head and hit him . Normal act of aggression in response to aggression or provocation in football . Same thing with Thomas Muller and Pepe . Pepe was frustrated with Muller overacting with little foul and was dumb enough to comeback to him headbutting him . Imagine if Pepe came back and bite him ? THE WHOLE WORLD WOULD WANT PEPE HANGED ON THE SAME DAY on the SAME STADIUM ON THE SAME SPOT !!

Pepe certainly has done worse things in his career but that headbuting to Muller just like Zidane did , was not a big deal . And punishment was according to the situation and evidence that were provided . PLus In both cases Players acted more on it just to get other one in trouble.

Think of this : Imagine you are in the bar , you have conflict with another person and he starts to biting you in response to your passive provocations . Already crazy right ? Imagine he bites out of no where for no clear reason at all .... That is just some animal stuff .

BTW Muller was left bleeding on the field from his head right after whistle in Ghanna match , where was the uproar and concern then ? Players were slowly walking towards the panel with referee .

this is fucking bullshit. i get the international ban, but why the fuck is he being banned for liverpool!?

Reckless play is not the same as dirty play.

Players like Keane, Gatusso and other physical chaps who have caused injuries through being too firm in the challenge, or going in too strong, of being reckless with their studs... those are all things worthy of punishment. They usually ARE punished, by yellows and reds. That's because they are for dangerous play, not for spite or for intentional harm to another player.

Dirty is different. Dirty is biting someone on purpose. Dirty is stamping on their back as you run over them. Dirty is actively leaping into the air so as to stamp on them more fully. Dirty is trying to hack someone's ankles from behind, with zero intention of going for the ball. Dirty is sticking your hand out to score a goal, or to deny one to your opposition. In a word: dirty is cheating, and in some cases outright violent.

That's why players get bans for fighting more often than they get bans for crunching tackles that result in injury, or going in studs-up, etc. There if a difference in seriousness, difference in tone, and difference in how much it brings the game into disrepute.

Suarez is guilt of all of the latter kind. Suarez is a dirty player. Sorry, guys, but it's just true.

He doesn't deserve the defense you're giving him, and comparisons to physical players of the past doesn't change this point.

That's my opinion. Agree or disagree as you like, but I for one have no idea how you can disagree.

quote Wolfie:
The same footballer could go in with a two footed challenge and smash a players ankles and that would be more normal because "these things happen"

if fact if you read my post you'll see that i've said basically the same thing. i agree with Marcus the most, every case needs to be evaluated and punished accordingly. while a bite is "by default" an act of extreme violence, let's say an indisputable code red; a tackle can reach the same level of violence, when intentional.

let's look again at Zidane's headbutt: Zizou too, he lost it in there, but he didn't go completely havoc as he headbutted Materazzi on the chest. notice that. he could headbutt him in the face and paint the pitch red, but he didn't. if he would have done that, then i'm sure we would see a more severe punishment.

@Taunis, thats exacly why you love Suarez, if you look at yourselfs i think you also would have loved to save a last minute shot with your hand beeing a hero in to country, that feeling would be euphoric. the diving and biting of luis suarez is idiotic but what he did vs Ghana was not. You might say its not part of the game but it is, he know his punishment for doing it, the red card. Its in the game to take tactical yellow cards when (for exampl) the oppositions having a counter attack but by your logic that would also be "not part of the game". Suarez took a tactical Red Card and stopped a goal. secrificing himself, whats wrong with that? if you call that unsporty you would also that a tackle from behind to stop a counter attack is also unsporty, Its not unsporty to take the ball deliberte with your hands, you just should not and cant be on the pitch after you have done it once.

And also people if you say Suarez should have longer penalty, whats wrong with you!? If you compare this to delebrate acts of albowing or punching to hurt (not part of the game) and violent tackles where the intention is to harm (which also not part of the game) you can see his punishment is just there to set an example which is wrong, equality infront of the law should go first! We dont want to live in an equal and democratic society right? You might say "but there is kids watching him and they might copy him". Well to that i say that a full WC ban is a really harsh penalty, harsh enough to send the message to kids they dont want to be doing this, you dont need the pathetic 4 month ban... Its just a cheep and wrong to bring up the "kids will take after" as an argument in the discussion.

Expel him from this WC and then give him mental help, that would be the best action to take.

Edited By Mod
Reason: the use of homophobic terms is not allowed on FR

@Knibis
And also people if you say Suarez should have longer penalty, whats wrong with you!?

see, Knibis, there's nothing wrong with us, it's an opinion and people are entitled to have their own. you call for democracy and then when you face a different opinion, that person who has expressed that opinion must have something wrong for you?

interesting.

@Knibis
And also people if you say Suarez should have longer penalty, whats wrong with you!?

see, Knibis, there's nothing wrong with us, it's an opinion and people are entitled to have their own. you call for democracy and then when you face a different opinion, that person who has expressed that opinion must have something wrong for you?

interesting.

@Knibis
"And also people if you say Suarez should have longer penalty, whats wrong with you!?"

see, Knibis, there's nothing wrong with us, it's an opinion and people are entitled to have their own. you call for democracy and then when you face a different opinion, that person who has expressed that opinion must have something wrong for you?

interesting.

@Knibis
"And also people if you say Suarez should have longer penalty, whats wrong with you!?"

see, Knibis, there's nothing wrong with us, it's an opinion and people are entitled to have their own. you call for democracy but then when you face a different opinion, that person who has expressed it must have something wrong?

interesting.