Suarez is a c*nt.

  • The Fighting Cock is a forum for fans of Tottenham Hotspur Football Club. Here you can discuss Spurs latest matches, our squad, tactics and any transfer news surrounding the club. Registration gives you access to all our forums (including 'Off Topic' discussion) and removes most of the adverts (you can remove them all via an account upgrade). You're here now, you might as well...

    Get involved!

Latest Spurs videos from Sky Sports

Sort by date Sort by reaction score
Anthony Beale said:
A bad tackle is an unfortunate accident, but biting someone is a conscious choice.
Click to expand...

Depends though. I can think of a fair few incidents where players have delberately gone out to harm an opponent by disguising it as a 'tackle.' (Roy Keane and Charlie Adam spring to mind but there are more.)
Wasn't it Bobby Robson that used to talk about putting a 'reducer' on a skillful player.

I think biting is seen as worse because it's just so animalistic and has no place at all on a football pitch. Spitting in someone's face is just as bad but obviously you don't get any physical pain from that.
 
Anthony Beale said:
A bad tackle is an unfortunate accident, but biting someone is a conscious choice.
Click to expand...

I think Arcspace was reffering to intentional leg/knee breakers like Roy Keane, but in general violent assult like tackles are very rare, can't remeber too many recently.
 
ArcspacE said:
Fouling your opponent is not part of the game either - do you believe retrospective action for malicious tackles is unnecessary?
Click to expand...

No not at all. In my opinion though, something like biting isn't really comparable to a malicious tackle.

Bad tackles should be punished retrospectively, but you need to be careful as it could make tackling become lame with people concerned at getting banned.

And biting someone, well I would take him to court (Not sure if you actually can). But it is just disgusting.
 
Yorkshire_Spurs said:
No not at all. In my opinion though, something like biting isn't really comparable to a malicious tackle.

Bad tackles should be punished retrospectively, but you need to be careful as it could make tackling become lame with people concerned at getting banned.

And biting someone, well I would take him to court (Not sure if you actually can). But it is just disgusting.
Click to expand...

The number one problem with a malicious tackle is proving intent. Sure, we've all seen the ones that to our minds are clearly malicious, but more often than not when you're completely neutral it's harder to gauge intent.
 
Benjamin said:
The number one problem with a malicious tackle is proving intent. Sure, we've all seen the ones that to our minds are clearly malicious, but more often than not when you're completely neutral it's harder to gauge intent.
Click to expand...

This. Reckless challenges should be judged on the individual incidents. Repeated violent conduct, no contact dives, etc should IMO be done on an increasing scale of punishment, as has been the case with Suarez and biting so far.
 
lol was only a matter of time

http://www.newstatesman.com/future-...-be-bitten-luiz-suarez-1-2000-shark-1-3700000

Some back-of-the-envelope maths regarding Luis Suarez: according to Wikipedia, he has played in 363 club league, cup and friendly matches since breaking through into the Nacional senior team in the 2005/06 season. He's also played 78 times for the Uruguay national team.

He has bitten three opposition players in the time it took him to play those 441 senior matches – PSV's Otman Bakkal in November 2010, Chelsea's Branislav Ivanović in April 2013, and now Italy's Giorgio Chiellini in the World Cup game on 24 June. This raises a crucial question: how much risk is a football player taking if Luis Suarez is on the opposition team? You’ve got to know the risks when you get involved in a contact sport, after all.

Let's crunch some numbers. Suarez’s bite rate of three in 441 means we can expect him to take a bite out of someone every 147 matches, but if we assume that there are 14 players at risk of being bitten (that's 11 starting players and assuming three substitutes come on) that means Suarez has bitten three players out of the 6,160 who have lined up against him in his professional career.

We can therefore conclude that Luis Suarez has roughly a one in 2,000 chance of biting any individual opposition player. For comparison, the following things are less likely than being bitten by Luis Suarez:

And, conversely, the following things are more likely than being bitten while playing against Luis Suarez:

Click to expand...
 
agBG90a.jpg
 
Anthony Beale said:
i disagree, i think he's just a cheating cunt. He bit out at Chiellini to provoke him, so he could win a penalty to take his team through. it was 0-0 at the time with about 9 minutes left and Urugauy needed a win to go through... pure and simple thats it. Nothing more to it.
Click to expand...

Fair call man. I think my post may have been widely misinterpereted. This is an horrendous little cunt, cheating his nut off. The type of pig who should be chased into the depths of the nearest jungle, strung up, and paraded through football's history. I was merely speaking from the analists point of view. If his ban is restricted to international football, then FIFA should be ashamed of the cowardice applied to their ruling.
 
jimmyriggle said:
Depends though. I can think of a fair few incidents where players have delberately gone out to harm an opponent by disguising it as a 'tackle.' (Roy Keane and Charlie Adam spring to mind but there are more.)
Wasn't it Bobby Robson that used to talk about putting a 'reducer' on a skillful player.

I think biting is seen as worse because it's just so animalistic and has no place at all on a football pitch. Spitting in someone's face is just as bad but obviously you don't get any physical pain from that.
Click to expand...
think i didnt make my point very well...
What i meant was, imagine you're a referee, if you saw someone get injured from a bad tackle, 99% of the time its almost impossible to tell the intention. A bad tackle could just be mistimed. But you can't ACCIDENTALLY lean in, open your mouth and bite someone?
What Suarez did wasnt animalistic or anything like that, it was purely cheating. His sole intention was to win a penalty for his team so they would get the goal they needed to take them through. Just like with the ivanovic one, they were 2-1 down at the time... its like diving but worse in my opinion because its a deliberate attempt to get a player sent off and win a pen.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom