vvvslaxman Posted June 28, 2014 Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 Really??? This is such an immature over-reaction/exaggeration. You take internet taunts/jokes so seriously that you throw your own objectivity out of the window? His act was at best animalistic, than cannibalistic. Cannibalism has a very specific definition - act or practice of eating (actual eating!!) flesh of other human beings ( if other words flesh of animals of your own species). It is quite common for kids to bite the other person, out of frustration/aggression, e.g. to get out of someone's strong hold - without the malicious intent of actually eating someone. Those kids are not labeled with cannibalistic tendencies. Suarez's was at best childish/idiotic act of aggression rather than cannibalistic intent. The intention in such case is to hurt/cause pain or provoke, and not eat the other person. If I get it right, dangerous tackles (while trying to win the ball) deserve yellow cards. And excessive/offensive use of force with the intention of harming/provocating someone, when the ball is not in play - deserve red card, and/or ban of few matches. I would like to see the actual words used in the punishment dished out by FIFA, even they would not have used the words 'repeated cannibalistic act' as a reason/measure for judging the severity of punishment. If they did - Suarez has every right to sue them and very strong chance (almost invincible) to even win a lawsuit of defamation. Civilized and honest way is to agree upon the rules in advance, and follow the rule book. If it did not have a clause for a specific/unseen act/incident, use least abstract one which covers it most closely. If you did not forsee certain punishable act, accept it and modify the rulebook accordingly when the emotions are not running high. Otherwise it sets bad precedents of lack of objectivity. Do you really think that following act is a part of the 'football tackle' and any less dangerous than Suarez's bite? http://gfycat.com/IdealEllipticalChimpanzee As per you, what should be the penalty of repeat offenses of such kind? ( e.g. Pepe is known to do similarly or more dangerous acts of unprovoked aggression, repeatedly). Do you really believe, it should be less severe than 3 bites in ~3-4 years? Not it is not. I have payed football all my school days, coolege days. Nobody ever tried bite anyone. It is an uncommon act even among children unlike hurting with legs or body while tackling. Where is the gray area while wilfully biting someone. You are merely going by the "effect". Yes you can kick harder than bite. Same way you can carry a plastic knife and hurt someone which may not be serious as hurting osmeone with your leg. Your claim should not be 1) there is no rule for plastic knife attack. so it should be treated on par with other rules 2) It is common among kids.. etc.. there is a reason why it is banned from all sports even if there are no written laws. You lose it when you say "it is quiet common" it is not in any contact sports. Why do you think bite punishment is stringent in all sports, why do you think advt companies pull their support down.. for immaturity? seriously? You are saying an interational star can bite someone 3 times and get away with the argument "i just acted childishly nothing else" Good Lord. If i am right FIFA can prosecute Suarez. But they don't Even the Italian defender can prosecute for attempting to assault as this is not football activity. There lies the difference between "so called childish act" and genuine fouls. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted June 28, 2014 Author Share Posted June 28, 2014 I cannot fathom how you can even defend this one. Mind boggling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 I cannot fathom how you can even defend this one. Mind boggling. Nobody is defending his idiotic act. The point of discussion is evaluating the punishment. I see lack of objectivity in the eventual punishment dished out and could be debated either way, on the scale of severity, just that I am leaning towards slightly lesser - given the precedents of other examples of similarly or even more dangerous acts or madness (not tackles). Ban from all kind of football related activities is too harsh, tournament ban (or plus few more matches) should have been enough. His acts have been on field, so just keep him off field. keeping him away from biggest stage for which he must have worked so hard for, is already solid enough. its not that he is biting people in the dugout, club practices etc. Besides, it is kind of scary that FIFA can exercise absolute power on all football related aspects/activities of a footballer. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 I cannot fathom how you can even defend this one. Mind boggling. Your mind is easily boggled, it seems. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted June 30, 2014 Author Share Posted June 30, 2014 Nobody is defending his idiotic act. The point of discussion is evaluating the punishment. I see lack of objectivity in the eventual punishment dished out and could be debated either way, on the scale of severity, just that I am leaning towards slightly lesser - given the precedents of other examples of similarly or even more dangerous acts or madness (not tackles). Ban from all kind of football related activities is too harsh, tournament ban (or plus few more matches) should have been enough. His acts have been on field, so just keep him off field. keeping him away from biggest stage for which he must have worked so hard for, is already solid enough. its not that he is biting people in the dugout, club practices etc. Besides, it is kind of scary that FIFA can exercise absolute power on all football related aspects/activities of a footballer. There is nothing scary about it. If i were in charge of FIFA i would have banned him for 1 year considering he is repeatedly biting people. If you allow people to get away with out of the ordinary violent behaviors on technicalities then it will set bad precedence. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
suraj Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 If no ban then he has to wear this Only way he can keep playing is like this: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 Besides, it is kind of scary that FIFA can exercise absolute power on all football related aspects/activities of a footballer. That's cause FIFA is THE organization that manages all football related activities around the world. It's like the ICC can ban someone from ever being involved in anything related to cricket. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
vvvslaxman Posted June 30, 2014 Author Share Posted June 30, 2014 Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted June 30, 2014 Share Posted June 30, 2014 This is like a routine. He bit Ivanovic and apologized to him on twitter. He is so slick! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
King Tendulkar Posted July 3, 2014 Share Posted July 3, 2014 wow what a front 3 Messi Neymar Suarez Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
SLICKR392 Posted July 4, 2014 Share Posted July 4, 2014 This guy should have bit Oliver Kahn. Would have been castrated on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 Can you still say a bite is most dangerous? If Zuniga was booked for this tackle (around 44minute), a clear red card. http://giant.gfycat.com/SarcasticDisgustingFlycatcher.gif This would not have happened: http://gfycat.com/ScentedJampackedArmyworm Broken vertebra! 3 bites in about 3 years, vs 2 leg (potentially)/back breaking tackles, within a span of 50 minutes...take your pick. Edit: Runco (Brazil's team doctor) just said that if the knee had hit a little more on top Neymar could become paraplegic Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
yoda Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 ^Dude, it is not always about the end result. The means are important as well. If someone spits at someone else, there is no inury. Are you saying, give a free pass to people to spit at each other? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
akshayxyz Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 ^Dude, it is not always about the end result. The means are important as well. If someone spits at someone else, there is no inury. Are you saying, give a free pass to people to spit at each other? Check out my earlier posts in this thread. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Old guy Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 U know what ? I agree ..this freaking robben has spoiled this game much more than anyone and deserves huge ban Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Stuge Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 ^ He was literally diving for every bit of touch and claming free kick ...he's got a good acting carrier ahead after football lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
hhunaeh Posted July 5, 2014 Share Posted July 5, 2014 This guy should have bit Oliver Kahn. Would have been castrated on the field. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now