Luis Suarez's 'Hand of God' gloating gets my goat

Thank you. And I agree, we love the game for the highs, the lows, the thrills and of course the skill! It's funny I don't blame Uruguay for supporting what happened and calling Suarez a hero, an angel and whatnot; I would feel elated if my country were through too, although truthfully I wouldn't applaud hand balling, accidental or otherwise. But as I said Suarez was booked and sent off so fair enough. I do think though in any profession you should be sporting, professional and basically just show good manners. And I think Suarez lacked all. For instance I was extremely annoyed when the Black Stars team captain seemed to be arguing constantly with the ref over issues during the match. After a while it becomes unnecessary and tiresome to watch. All said and done though it was an enjoyable game, and I think Ghana played well against them; and I must say that though I've only managed to watch a few matches from the tournament, it has so far been an entertaining and surprising World Cup!

Narthbor - You are to be commended for your graceful acceptance of the Suarez injustice - I (and, far too many Aussies) are still whinging about Grosso's theatrical dive on that ill-fated evening in Kaiserslautern in 2006!! I totally agree with your assessment. 1. Suarez committed a foul, the foul was penalised, Suarez was sent-off but, unfortunately, Ghana missed the penalty. That's football and it's the reason we love - not hate - the game! 2. The shame is the way Suarez and Uruguay have behaved after the event. If Suarez had been remorseful and said: "... I feel sad for the Ghanains but I had to do it for my country and accept that what I did was against the Laws of the Game", I would hold Suarez in much higher regard.

yeebarr AndyRoo has summed it up perfectly. My understanding is that the suspension handed out after a red card offence is determined by the tribunal set up by the tournament organiser - at the World Cup the tribunal will be a FIFA World Cup tribunal. During the A-League and ACL, suspensions for a red card offense would be handled by the FFA and AFC respectively. PS: I'm pretty sure suspensions "carry over", which means if a player is red-carded and receives a suspension, the suspension will continue and prevent that player from competing in any tournaments organised by THAT organisation. e.g. a suspension received in the FIFA WC Final would prevent players from playing in the next WC Qualifiers but would not prevent them from playing in their domestic competitions such as the A-League, EPL, La Liga, etc.

Yeebar I only know the local rules not the world cup rules but if you get a straight red card for violent play then you can be suspended for however long the association see's fit (their is normally a hearing). If you intentionally busted someones knee you could be looking at a life ban... but probably you would be more concerned about Police action. I know at the world cup they do have the power to extend bans but they rarely do. if it was really shocking and not just a misstimed tackle then I imagine they would. You rarely see them extend just because it's easier to give out the regular ban rather than make a fuss when it's not needed.

Ah, ok - cheers Aka (and Fussball). I probably should have been clearer in my example but your assumptions were pretty good and I appreciate the answers. What I would like to know, if a player went mental on another player, is there any harsher penalty other than a red card and a 2 match penalty (I'm saying 2 because that's the number I heard Suarez was potentially facing)? Can a player be banned for more than 2 matches?

An aggressive sliding tackle is not necessarily a foul. depends on what you mean by aggressive. I'm assuming you mean aggressive at the ball and the aggression is not aimed at injuring the attacker. Also a foul inside the box may be a penalty but not a send off. In fact it may not even be a yellow card. The penalty and the red card are seperate decisions. A penalty is awarded for a foul inside the box. The red card is either for the tackle itself which would be a red card anywhere on the pitch or for fouling to deny an obvious goals scoring opportunity. Which doesn't necessarily have to have been committed in the box. The send off is for the type of foul. the penalty is for where it occurred. clear as mud?

To be fair to Suarez (oh by the way I'm part Ghanaian) I actually don't think he meant to handle the ball; I do think it was more a snap instinctive movement. I don't think he deliberately meant to cheat. And hey we were awarded a penalty and Asamoah Gyan missed. Sad but true. We went to penalties and lost. Ah well. Better luck next time Ghana! But like the author of this article I get annoyed hearing Suarez calling himself the 'Hand of God' and gloating that he hand balled what in my mind was a goal bound ball. If he had said 'man it was an accident but ah well Ghana missed fair and square and that's the nature of the game', you know what, fair enough! I think I would respect him more for that, but maybe I'm biased. :-) And the Uruguay coach made a mistake when playing against Holland, dude, you had the wrong goalkeeper...should have put in Luis Suarez, he certainly has been a great goalie for you! ;-) All jokes aside though, I do agree that video-ref should be introduced in football, no doubt about that! Not because of perceived or obvious cheating, but it certainly would help give more accurate scoring, opinions on fouls blah blah blah. England scored a second goal against Germany, no doubt about that! And I'm sure there are many more instances any number of fans can count where an injustice has occurred both in this World Cup as well as in leagues. Personally I don't see why FIFA are so against this, the fans make this game what it is so let's have no more debates on this issue. Hopefully soon they will change their mind. You know what FIFA- Just do it! Good luck to Holland and Spain in the finals as well as Uruguay and Germany. And hopefully Ghana we'll be back in 2014. Peace out!

@yeebarr Here's my answer to your question ... "... would there be any difference in my punishment if I stopped a player from scoring a goal by sweeping their leg OR deliberatly breaking their knee" Unfortunately, there are so many variables to your question that it makes it hard to give a definitive answer. 1. Let's assume that the offence occurred in the penalty box then, prima facie, a penalty will be awarded in both your scenarios. 2. In both scenarios there is also a possibility that the offending player will receive a red card - the relevant law is ... A red card will be issued if the player: a) denies the opposing team a goal or obvious goal-scoring opportunity by deliberately handling the ball b) denies an obvious goal-scoring opportunity to an opponent, who is moving towards the goal by fouling the player Generally, speaking a red-card is issued only when the offender is "the last man" (not including the goalkeeper) between the attacker and the goal. So, you can foul a player in the box as he is about to shoot for goal but you may not be sent off. 3. The injury sustained by your foul is irrelevant when it comes to penalising or sanctioning a player on the day of the match. Note: Breaking a player's leg is not, in itself, a red card offence. For a red card to be issued there must be "serious foul play" or "violent conduct".

Well said dasilva. I'd be surprised if any roarers truly believed competitive sports didn't involve some level of "rule-bending" (I've learnt my lesson - the C word is just too inflammatory!) - tiddly-winks maybe?. Is it just the way a person PERCEIVES how aggressive players are when pushing the boundaries of the rules - combined with how the laws of a sport are enforced - which determine a persons tolerance to a particular sport? My son and I can watch the same game of football and while it gets up my goat, he loves the drama. Fair enough. As an aside can I ask a (hopefully) non-flaming question? In football, if I attempt to stop an opponent scoring a goal - is there any difference in the on-field penalty between an aggressive sliding takle OR, say, deliberately breaking the knee caps of the attacker? Both instances are a red card and a free penalty kick (which could be missed), yes?

Well said dasilva. When it comes to professional sports (hell even amateur depending on the circumstances of the player) I think we can all agree that cheating/pushing the boundaries/aggressive tactics are going to come into it. It's the fine line between how the laws work/are enforced vs how the players can push them which will determine each persons "threshold of tolerance" to watching a particular sport (I personally would like to know the stats on "cheating" in Table Tennis - I'd bet it would surprise us all) But a question to the football gurus out there (since my involvement with soccer is watching my son on the sidelines on a Saturday morning): in football, would there be any difference in my punishment if I stopped a player from scoring a goal by sweeping their leg OR deliberatly breaking their knee? Is it just a red card (and a penalty kick which they might miss)? Not trying to aggravate here - would really like to know what the laws would dictate in, say, a test match situation.

Fussball - pull it out mate. I never said other sports didn't have cheating - I said that FIFA seems to be the one sport that sees it as part of the game and doesn't care about stamping it out. If you love football and that's what makes a sport interesting to you then more power to you - I don't have an issue with it. First organised Roar sports day, Fussball and Samsport are on my side; they apparently are the only people that play in the real world.

My Dad was my soccer coach for many years and he once told me "do whatever you need to make sure they dont score, its either the ball or the man that gets past you not both" Any manager in that type of match would expect their player to do what Suarez did. My suggestion is that we introduce a penalty goal like rugby to stop this and punish players.

@ yeebarr And, how's that video technology working for you in cricket. Has it stopped the "cheating" - i.e. are batsmen walking when they know they're out? Are fieldsmen admitting the ball was not caught? And, most importantly, are all video decisions unanimously agreed, or is there still debate amongst analysts, commentators and spectators, even after the video is observed frame-by-frame? Some of you people need to experience the real world and you will quickly realise humans are flawed and this is what makes life interesting, exciting, and, at times, unjust.

Which is why these other sports have been pushing to use video technology while football refuses. I'm not sayiing we live in a world without cheats (but thanks for clearing that up for me SamSport) - I'm just saying it's almost like "pushing the boundaries" (is that better for your sensibilites if I call it that rather than cheating?) is encouraged in football.

No one is arguing whether Football has unsporting behaviour. Their point is that why should Football be singled out for cheating when other sports have it as well. No one has statistics on whether cheating is more common in Football compared to rugby and AFL etc. That's the point that most people are defending from criticism. Although saying that, just from 'gut feeling' I do believe that Football has a bigger problems with cheats compared to other sports even if I don't have evidence because of two reasons. 1) Some cultures don't view breaking the rules of the game as cheating and they celebrate players who do it (Suarez and Maradona). Some even make it an art form (furbizia - the art of guile). Some see deceiving referees as a glorified way of sticking it up to authority, 2) There is lack of disincentive for cheating. If the player gets away with cheating on the field. They will not be suspended for their cheating activity as there is no post match video review to watch over the game and suspend players. Therefore cheating goes unpunished. Therefore if you don't cheat, your team is at a supreme disadvantage. Most other sports if players cheat, they will get punish if there is video evidence. Football is an exception Also sports that exist in a monoculture environment, there is a consensus on what is cheating and therefore when players do cheat they are generally condemn for it and not celebrate for it. If a Suarez like or Maradona like event happen in a sport that exist in a monoculture environment, they would be vilified by the media.

ballboy This whole debate started with this comment: "He kept asking me why the players were arguing, fighting and being mean to the referee. And he plays the game at the most junior level. I can’t wait until he’s old / big enough to start rugby." Wouldn't you say that is pretty provocative, and would naturally get a response from football lovers who are passionate about their sport. Anyway my point to you (and True Tah) is why do you see everything in black and white. Good and evil. Wrong and right. You live in Ivory towers. I think football supporters accept the grey area much more readily than say rugby union supporters. It's not that I agree with a lot of things that happen. And the way Suarez celebrated the penalty miss from the Ghanian got to me. But I guess I just see no point in gettng riled up about it, because this is the way the world is. I think football is a reflection of the world we live in, and this why I like it. It is universal. I hope that makes sense.

NY - I like the game. that's not my point My point initially was the Fussball says that 'it’s human nature to argue whenever anyone chastises your behaviour. Whether it’s your parents, your teachers , your spouse, the police, etc.,' is a statement that says a lot about his mentality / way of thinking. I've said through this thread that football players don't respect the referee. They bully them numerous times throughout a game. No-one has been able to offer a defence that says they don't. Fussball liked the world cup to a game of junior district rugby and if that's the best you can offer as a retort then the writing is really on the wall. Is there any wonder that the violence we see at football games in the crowds around the world happens. they treat each other like their heroes behave. Bully boy tactics. Football is a beautiful game to watch when played properly. Germany's dismemberment of Argentina the other night was one of the most clinical sporting displays I have ever seen. But don't bury your head in the sand and think the game hasn't got its problems. And don't tell me to move on. I'm debating here and waiting for someone to put forward an alternative point of view that is valid and adds to the discussion. . If you can't stand the truth go and read some fiction.

"I congratulate you if you have never once argued or expressed surprise and indignation when accused of wrongful actions." This is exactly what you are doing now ballboy. Trying to express surprise that people find your sport (rugby union) has some unethical tendencies. No sport is perfect. Not even yours. Time to move on and perhaps forget about your least favourite sport (football).

Are you guys serious. You're really going to compare Parra District Junior rugby with International players??? Again, says it all. And for the record, I'm a union guy so don't dump me in the the leaguies. But, since you brought it up, yes Thurston was out of line. One incident. name me three others. I can give you five a game from the World Cup. your arguement is as thin as it is laughable.

"Well done to suarez, will be forever a hero in uruguay" Until of course he loses the final by missing a penalty.......wouldn't that be Karma!! :-D Or better still a shot hits him on the chest and the ref gives a penalty for hand ball....I would love to see that!!