A lot of people are saying that Uruguay’s Suarez’s hand ball was cheating, which it was, but I am here to tell those people why they should stop talking. Suarez undoubtedly handled the ball intentionally, but, this is where the complaining should stop because him handling the ball was just a player doing what he needed to do in order to win.
He committed a faul, in the penalty area, and it was rewarded/punished as such. He was awarded a red card and Ghana was given the penalty kick. It is not Suarez’s fault that Ghana missed the penalty kick in the 120th minute that would have surely sent them into the Semis.
If Ghana would have made the spot kick, no one would make a big fuss about it, just like if Henry’s hand ball against Ireland would have been disallowed and Ireland would have made the World Cup, there wouldn’t have been nearly as much discussion.
If you honestly think that in the split second between when the ball was kicked to when it was handled, that Suarez consciously thought that Ghana would get a penalty kick only to miss it, then you are delusional. Suarez did what he had to do and was punished.
18 Responses to “World Cup: Luis Suarez Controversy”
Leave a Reply
| 1 |  |
Free Bet | bet | review |
| 2 |  |
€100 Bonus | bet | review |
| 3 |  |
$250 Bonus  |
bet | review |
| 4 |  |
€100 Bonus | bet | review |
| 5 |  |
10% Bonus |
bet | review |
- Best Live Score Sites – NFL, MLB, NBA, NHL, CFL, Golf, Tennis and Soccer
- How Not To Rob A Sportsbook
- NASCAR Betting Free Picks: Daytona 500
- Winter Olympics Betting: Total Medal Count
- Handicapping the ‘new’ Arena Football League
- Tips On Betting The Superbowl: Part 2 of 2
- Tips On Betting The Superbowl: Part 1 of 2
- NFL football betting: Handicapping the wild card round
- College football betting: handicapping the ‘late’ bowl games
- Handicapping final week NFL betting
- May 8th, 2012
Worst Soccer Crotch Kick Ever - March 29th, 2011
Euro 2012 qualifying: Czech Republic vs Liechtenstein Odds and Predictions - March 29th, 2011
Euro 2012 qualifying match preview: Belgium vs Azerbaijan Odds - March 29th, 2011
Estonia vs Serbia Odds and Preview – Euro 2012 Qualifier - March 29th, 2011
Euro 2012 qualifying preview: Northern Ireland vs Slovenia - March 29th, 2011
Euro 2012 Qualifying: Turkey vs Austria Odds - March 29th, 2011
Euro 2012 qualifying: Lithuania vs Spain Odds and Predictions - March 26th, 2011
Euro 2012 Qualifying Group H: Cyprus vs Iceland and Norway vs Denmark - March 26th, 2011
Wales vs England – Euro 2012 Qualifying Odds - March 18th, 2011
Drug cartels found to fuel Colombian soccer clubs
I completely agree. Because of what Suarez did, he has become my favorite football player. His intentions were on that of the team, not of his self: which is the whole purpose of the team. Honestly, if I had tons of football players from Ghana blasting those balls at point blank range into the goal (with the goal keeper gone) I would have done the same thing… so I think his choice was not only with the team in mind, but also very logical.
FIFA needs to adjust the rules. It is not the same when there is an illegal hand foul as to when a nongoalie stops a ball with his hands. On this situation, the goal must count and the player ejected. This will deter this kind of cheating because this is really cheating.
@Enrique Fletes:
“It is not the same when there is an illegal hand foul as to when a nongoalie stops a ball with his hands.” Why is it not the same? In both cases there is an illegal hand ball. Actually, these two cases are identical. According to the rules, a player is punished when they intentionally commit a hand ball; unintentional hand balls are not punished.
The punishment he got totally does not compensate for his action.
* Punishment
1. penalty kick – now they get chance that Ghana might miss a shot vs. ending the game
2. red card – not being able to play rest of the game which was 0 anyways! miss following game? there would have been no other game to play if the shot went in
*Reward – chance to advance
He would never have done this in the first minute into the game.
He would not risk playing with 10 people for 89 minutes and missing the following game while they have 89 mins to recover. If he did this at least half way into the game, I would say he was properly punished but at the last minute, I would not say he was properly punished. To be equitable, he should be banned at least two more games in cost of many people who played honest football on behalf their county.
His handling goes against the sportsmanship or I guess the writer of this article will call it “smart”.
So it’s okay to cheat as long as it helps your team win?
I’m with “Cheating”. There’s a big difference between a handball in the middle of a game and one that stops the game-winning goal in the quarterfinals of the World Cup.
The “it is not Suarez’s fault that Ghana missed the penalty kick” argument is completely trumped by the “it is Suarez’s fault that Ghana needed to take a penalty kick at all” fact.
In a case like this, as well as the Henry handball, the team benefitted from cheating. Perhaps the team needs to be penalized as well. I think if teams started getting ejected from the tournament for blatant cheating you might see a little less of that sort of thing.
@Cheating
The punishment Suarez got is according to the rules of the game. Anything beyond that would be arbitrary and consequently unfair.
The fact is a football game lasts 90 (or 120) minutes and everything that happens in that game is subject to rules and regulations. Everything else you say is inconsequential. Sportsmanship has nothing to do with it. When the hand-ball occurred has nothing to do with it. Calling what Suarez did cheating implies the violation of accepted standards or rules. This is not the case here as the rules were applied.
In this case, Suarez missed 0 time in the match. His \ejection\ was for the one penalty kick he most likely would have attempted and the theoretical game in the semifinal, to which Uruguay most certainly would not have advanced had he not handled the ball. So merely claiming the \rules were applied\ is not exactly true. The \win at all costs\ mentality weakens the Beautiful Game. The people of Uruguay — just like the French — should have been ASHAMED to advance as they did. What a great lesson to show our children: trade a certain goal for a near-certain goal whenever you can. Use the rules to nullify the skill and determination of your opponents. This episode ranks right up there with Renault’s deliberate crash at the Singapore Grand Prix as the worst incident of cheating in the history of sport.
@Fox
Claiming that everyone act according the rule undermind the Sports itself.
Rules are there to preserve the sportsmanship. Rules are the bare bottom minimum requirement to play the game. Sports’ intention is to compete in fair manner and that goes without saying anything about the rules. Suarez’s act is totally not to the sports’ intention. It may have been a smart act to “win” but it is violation that ruins the sportsmanship and if this happens frequently, I can assure you that FIFA will impose a so called “rules” on this act (Suarez’s handball) as it diminishes the value of sports. FIFA will not allow people to play volley ball on the last minute. He was just lucky that most people did not abuse the rules and played in good faith that he got away with it. A player can take advantage but discussin fair / sportsmanship is out of question. It is unfair and goes against sportsmanship.
Also, by definition, cheating is to creat unfair advantage which he did in this case. Whether the rules were applied to the players is totally irrelevant to the fact that he cheated. He cheated so the rules were applied is the correct statment.
He cheated and abused the rules.
According to Fox’s reasoning, if a kid gets caught cheating in a exam and gets kicked out he did not cheat as he was properly punished (kicked out – rules are applied). The truth is that he cheated.
@Rizman, @Cheating
I have a feeling that neither of you understand the nature of competitive sports. The people that play in the World Cup have a winning, whatever it takes, mentality. Otherwise they would not be the elite of a sport played by a few billion people.
So, what both of you are suggesting is that at the 120th minute of overtime, at one of the defining moments of his career and probably his life, and with split second speed, Suarez should have contemplated “Hmm, I should be fair and let Ghana score”, go against the instincts that have gotten him million dollar contracts and world-class status, allow the opposition to score, and condemn his team to defeat. You guys would’ve made great professional footballers to be sure.
History will show that Uruguay advanced and Ghana didn’t, and in the end that’s all that matters. It’s not like Suarez killed anybody. Within the framework of the game, and at an opportune moment, he made a split second decision that allowed his team to continue fighting for the opportunity to advance to the semi-finals. He got punished for it, according to the rules of the game.
@Rizman
The fact that Suarez missed zero time is irrelevant as the rules were followed (like you say, he missed the penalties and he eventually missed the next game, those are the rules). You say “merely claiming the \rules were applied\ is not exactly true”. Actually, to say that the rules were applied is exactly the point here. Suarez could not have known that Gyan would’ve missed the penalty, or that Uruguay would eventually go on to win the game. He just gave his team a fighting chance, and for that he was penalized according to the rules.
@Cheating
There are many definitions to cheating. I chose to use this one “violating accepted standards or rules”, which obviously didn’t happen as Suarez was punished according to the rules. You chose to use the following: “is employed to create an unfair advantage”. I fail to see the unfair advantage. That his team had a fighting chance is an unfair advantage? He did not win the game for Uruguay, and this might be a confusing point for you. Ghana had every opportunity to win the game after the hand-ball. Furthermore, you say “he cheated and abused the rules”? How exactly did he abuse the rules? Was he not sent off? Did Ghana not have a penalty, and a chance to win the game?
And while it is possible to compare a kid that gets caught cheating in an exam, and Suarez’s action, a closer analysis shows this comparison to be superficial at best. The kid would probably have plenty of time to choose between cheating and not cheating, while Suarez made an instinctive and split second action. While the kid would be selfish in trying to benefit only itself, Suarez’s action was at least partly selfless as he was benefiting the team first. And the contexts, a football game versus an exam, are absolutely not comparable.
@MacSaorsa
There is a difference between a hand-ball in the middle of the game and the one that Suarez made, but not according to the rules. The big difference between Suarez and Henry is that Suarez got punished while Henry did not, and that France benefited immediately from Henry’s action while Uruguay was only kept alive by Suarez’s action. Again a very superficial comparison.
And the “it is not Suarez’s fault that Ghana missed the penalty kick” argument is only part of the story here. The other part is that Ghana lost the penalty shoot-out. You cannot loose 3 penalties (one of which was a golden goal) and expect to progress to the semifinals. I’m sure that you need Suarez to be responsible for Ghana’s demise. But if they were the better team they would’ve gotten through by scoring more goals. Everything else is hubris.
i completely agree with fox. if you are in anygame of some sort and you are put in that type of situation then my best guess is you will do anythimg not to lose. i am a soccer player and was put in a situation like that. i play defense and was the last man back and got beat so when i run back i clip the dude so he doesnt score yea i got red carded but saved my team from getting beat so you decide
@fox
The way I see it, rules were implemented to deter unfair actions. A handball at any part in the game is an unfair action, and therefore there is a rule to deter it. Hands are not a part of soccer, so anyone using them (besides the goalie, obviously) is gaining and unfair advantage, and so he/she is cheating. Thus, there is a punishment. Simply put: hands are not a part of soccer!
Your argument is basically saying that the rules will allow him to commit a handball and this is ok under the condition that he is penalized for it. The thing is, his actions are NOT ok, because there is a punishment! Changing the game up is not allowed! No matter how you put it, he gave his team an unfair advantage. Yes, he wanted to win, but blocking that ball with his hands was not fair, because everyone knows hands are not part of soccer. Cheating on a test gives you an unfair advantage and is punished because the action is not permitted. It was not supposed to happen. It is simply impossible to condone an action in which one individual or team implements a “winning technique” which is so blatantly not permitted.
Furthermore, this handball is NOT the same as any other handball. You can see this by the punishment given. Normally he would get a warning or a yellow card. Here, he got a RED card and Ghana was allowed a penalty kick. Also, his handball was clearly intentional and had repercussions which ultimately affected the entire outcome of the game. A handball in the middle of the field has only a minute effect and so is given a small punishment.
It is not fair to summarize his actions as simply a ‘handball’ – he prevented a goal by implementing a method every preschool kid knows is not part of the game.
@Cheating
Yes, hands are not meant to be used in soccer. And yes, rules are implemented to deter certain actions, including handball. But that does not mean that using your hand gives you an unfair advantage, overall. I can agree with you that the precise moment when Suarez prevented Ghana from scoring could be considered an unfair advantage. But after that moment passed, Uruguay did not have an unfair advantage anymore, and Ghana had every opportunity to advance. In fact, it is arguable that since Suarez got evicted, Ghana had an advantage as Suarez was one of the best players in the Uruguay team.
Furthermore, Suarez’s handball is exactly like any other handball. The reason Suarez got a red card and Ghana was allowed a penalty was not an arbitrary decision made due to the ‘severity’ of the situation. It is the standard punishment for all handballs in the penalty area. A yellow card is given to handballs outside the penalty area. Also, the intention, or lack-of, of the handball dictates whether or not a card is given, but not the color of the card. Again, color is based solely on the location that the handball is committed.
You basically argue that Suarez’s action cannot be condoned because it is unfair. I will argue that as long as he was acting within the framework of the game (he didn’t bribe anyone, he didn’t kill anyone, he didn’t hurt anyone, etc.), all is fair.
@Fox
You make me laugh. Red card based on the location of the violation is the most ridiculous assertion I have ever heard about the soccer rules. Have the facts straight first. It’s not the location but the intention of the player which led to the red card. It’s apparent that you do not understand the soccer very much.
Second, you do not have good logic. Hurting someone in the game is totally fine as it could happen during normal course of the game and only thing that you have to do is a red card and get thrown out of the game. This is should your logic if I apply the same thinking process as the handball case. Yet you do not support hurting somebody but support handball contradicting yourself.
Handball is cheating and even after that moment Uruguay had great advantage mentally by being saved from elimination through this “cheating”.
You are claiming that if there is a student who cheated and got thrown out of the class, he can claim that since he was taken the chance to take an exam he NEVER cheated and his acts are acceptable.
I understand where Suarez trying to avoid losing at any cost but cheating is still cheating.
@Cheating
I don’t think I will take lessons about the rules of the game from someone who refers to football as soccer (see FIFA, UEFA, FA, etc. if in doubt). If you are in doubt about the rules of football, please see this link: http://bit.ly/9sZFxf. I quote:
—
In Fifa’s Laws of the Game 2005, Law 12 says a free-kick or penalty will be awarded if a player “handles the ball deliberately (except for the goalkeeper within his own penalty area)”.
Page 67 of the document gives “additional information for referees, assistant referees and fourth officials”.
It adds: “Referees are reminded that deliberately handling the ball is normally punished by a direct free-kick or penalty kick if the offence occurred inside the penalty area.
—
Which is what I was saying in my previous posting. The intention of the player determines whether a card is given, but the location determines the color of the card.
With regards to ‘hurting someone in the game’, I think I didn’t make myself clear. I meant a more malicious kind of action, like a player punching another player. Something that goes outside the normal physical nature of the sport. Obviously, rough tackles are a possibility, and they get punished accordingly.
In terms of the mental or psychological advantage, or lack-of, that Uruguay may have had right after the handball, that’s speculative and debatable (you were not in those player’s heads). The fact is that Ghana lost three out of five penalties, one of which was a golden goal.
With regards to your example of a ‘child cheating in an exam’, as I said in a previous response, I find such a comparison to be very superficial. If you have nothing to say to this criticism, please don’t use this example again.
@Fox
I just want to say your rule does not say anything about the color of the card in the penalty box – please read. It talks nothing about the color of the card in relation to the location.
Who are you to determine malicious kind of action? That handball is most malicious thing that you can ever do in a game.
If you say hanball was okay due to the fact that it’s punished, I can understand just a little bit in a sense that it could happen and he got punished even though it is “CLEARLY” cheating. However, you should treat all the other violations same as they get punished accordingly yet you judgmentally differenciate fouls to “malicious”. “hurting” or any other no non-sense terms. That is why I am saying you are contridicting yourself.
You are a kid who just want to look talk like a mature person i.e. “quit whining and suck it up” but you do not have the logic for sure. Don’t worry, it’s not your fault that your IQ is low.
@Cheating
I think this has gone on for a bit too long now. I’m sure even the moderators are probably starting to get tired.
I realize the rule does not say anything about the card color. It is my observation from watching quite a few football games that intentional handballs usually receive yellow outside the penalty area, and red inside the penalty area. Maybe I should try to find the complete FIFA rule book just to confirm this.
As to the nature of maliciousness, I would think that hurting someone physically and intentionally, and outside the normal game (like punching, stabbing), is worst than handball. That’s just my moral value system I guess. Funny that you disagree with this.
You say: “However, you should treat all the other violations same as they get punished accordingly yet you judgmentally differentiate fouls to ‘malicious’. ‘hurting’ or any other no non-sense terms.”
When do I do that? I think you should read my posts a bit more carefully. The point I was trying to make was that as long as Suarez was acting within the framework of the game (he didn’t bribe anyone, he didn’t kill anyone, he didn’t hurt anyone, etc.), all is fair. By hurt, I meant something that goes beyond the rough tackling of the game (for example, punching, stabbing, biting, etc.). I don’t understand why this is such a sticking point for you.
From the overall conversation, I’m getting the impression that you don’t know too much about football, but that you’re obviously pissed off about Suarez’s handball (maybe you really wanted Ghana to win, for whatever reason). I don’t think you know much about football because of the way you argue. What Suarez did is not the worst thing that can happen in a game, and for you to argue this makes me think that you don’t follow the sport closely. You should accept that Ghana deserved to loose; they deserved to loose because they missed three out of five penalties, one of which was a golden goal.
Every team make tactical fouls to prevent the other team to advance towards the Goal sometimes. They are risky and can even harm some players however no one says nothing. This was harmless to anyone, Materazzi and Zidane did much worse than Suárez in the last final, so what? He did what he felt he had to do to help his country.