mcmanus said:
Rocket-footed kolarov said:
I know you are a bit slow at times but how does "10 match international ban" translate as a month or two in your head? I did a bit of digging to investigate how long it would take to serve a 10 match ban and it would take almost a year if Uruguay's fixture schedule is anything like the year following the previous world cup.
<a class="postlink" href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80%9311_in_Uruguayan_football" onclick="window.open(this.href);return false;">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2010%E2%80 ... n_football</a>
There were 15 games in all played that year. But you also have to take into account other factors of course, such as any further games played in the world cup (Uruguay have at least one to play), and the fact that 9 of the 15 international games were friendlies, two of which (Copa Confraternidad de Antel and Copa 100 Años del Banco de Seguros del Estado) were prestige friendlies sponsored by corporations (A telecom giant, and a bank), one of which was a 100 year commemoration- so not likely to be played in the coming year. I have checked FIFA's index for Uruguay fixture and they only have one friendly lined up (against Saudi Arabia in Jeddah), Although a strong finish or even victory may increase the amount of friendlies played. But then again that is restricted by FIFA international dates. A 10 match ban in all likelihood affect his available appearances at the Copa America next year, it is also worth noting the difference of magnitude between 10 Liverpool league fixtures that weren't exactly most important , and an inevitable world cup expulsion if he receives any punishment. This is not about a deterrent, the player obviously had anger issues and one he is angry he hits out by biting. People don't behave in a considered and rational manner when the red mist descends. The punishment even when severe may not be enough to make him seek anger management treatment. A 12 month ban would also be appropriate- there is not much between the a 10 match and a 12 month as I have demonstrated, but a fixed time period may send a greater message. A 2 year ban is disproportionate to the offence, and although Suarez's previous character should be taken into account, there is no need to view this as criminal proceedings as some posters appear to be doing.
'
Cheers for that.
However the last two times he's sunk his teeth into an opposition player it has been in domestic football and been banned for 8 and 10 games for the incidents, which kinda is about two months worth of football each time. I've got the feeling that these punishments are not particularly working as demonstrated last night. He kinda still thinks biting folk isn't wrong.
A lengthy worldwide ban might just put into his obvious tiny brain that putting his quite big teeth into others isn't really on.
I was just winding you up mate. I know it doesn't bother you, I do the same to Markt85,
I don't think you nearly as thick as you call yourself out at times. The trouble is that a deterrent is based on rationality and obviously Suarez has a short fuse which impairs his ability to think rationally and control himself, I think if you took away the aggression he would actually perform at a poorer level. Bellamy was bastard, not quite the same as Suarez but a bastard nonetheless, and he admitted himself that his on the pitch persona was his game face he put on, otherwise he would lose attention and drift out of the game. The player himself therefore may not actually care about anger management because of a reason such as that. There is another thing, people moan about lack of characters in sport and that people are boring but then paradoxically "expect" players to be well be behaved and act as though they have a professional code of conduct like doctors and lawyers, and condemn even the slightest misdemeanor and demand for lifetime bans, deportation,etc in response. But then some people are stupid aren't they, although again I wouldn't consider you one of them,