Luis Suarez in new cheat storm

[Mosiah]

Unbelievable!

[Tilla]

Did I hear that Paul recently moved to Colorado? Or better yet, he must have been sipping on that Jack Daniels and Coke while watching. Those things will mess up one's perception of reality.

[Paul Marin]

You are being a disingenuous and a HYPERCRITE!

WTF!? You are calling me a HYPERCRITE!? LOL!!!! What a joke! You all have one set of rules for Suarez and a next for everyone else. Yotan directly put him knee Suarez behind and y'all are saying what? No foul?* LOL!!! Joke bizness diss. So if a pickpocket steals $1, does it make it alright because the victim over reacts?

*Karl already educated you to the fact that refs don't look at the reaction, they look at the INFRACTION.

[Paul Marin]

Did I hear that Paul recently moved to Colorado? Or better yet, he must have been sipping on that Jack Daniels and Coke while watching. Those things will mess up one's perception of reality.

Me don't drink Jack, and Colorado too col'...is unu man deh eena corn field so long that me worry 'bout...unu jink too much moonshine and romp with gyal dem wid two first name, like Becky-Sue! LOL!!!

[Peter R]

Anti-Suarez emotion tends to cloud judgment of reality. I don't think there is any dispute that Suarez over-reacted to that challenge but IMO it was a foul, maybe not a heavy foul nor as serious as Suarez made it out to be... but the ref had no choice but to blow.

I think it's important to distinguish between "simulation" and "over-reaction". In your clip of the foul by the Costa Rican against the American, that was clearly "simulation" whereas the Yotun incident with Suarez is "over-reaction". Neither of these acts are IMO admirable, I know you agree, but certainly "simulation" to get a free kick or get the opponent carded is really despicable.

The real question is: Is the ref influenced by over-reaction in what he awards? free kick only, or plus yellow or red card. One would think by now that any ref who is doing an international match should be aware of various antics that players will pull in order to influence them.

I didn't see a replay of the red card incident but I think you stated you didn't agree with the ref for handing out the red card... to which you were asked why you think it was awarded. You answered it and were called a "HYPERCRITE" for your troubles because Gamma didn't like your answer. I am guessing that's why he called you that but only he could explain.

I think someone else was lambasting South American refs for their bias which, if true, wouldn't apply in this case as the teams involved were both South American. Unless, of course, the ref has a bias towards Uruguay and against Perú.

The real culprit in all of this IMO, are the stewards of the game who refuse to clamp down on behaviour intended to mis-lead the ref. Is there an appeal process for people like Besly (sp) where the review panel can look at an incident and overturn the refs call (rescind a card) if needs be? If it cannot be established that there is grounds for reversal refs call would stand. It seems simple enough to me. At the same time if there is video (or other) evidence to demonstrate that the ref was fooled by "simulation", the "simulator" should be slapped with an automatic three match ban... or whatever is deemed appropriate.

There must be some way to eradicate the scourge of both simulation and over-reaction from the game.

[Karl]

Ref's call on facts of the game stand...but cautions and expulsions which draw penalties outside of the game (Meted out in the 'boardroom') can be overturned...and have been in the past...e.g. red card may under rules of a competition demand missing match or matches - those can be set aside e.g. no match missed).

...but man get sen off an im team dis-had-vantage...dat deh jus tough.

[Gamma]

yup ... beyond hypocrite!! especially when it comes to suarez ... an mi naw tek back mi chat!

he is a reprobate of flawed character ... some people will make a mistake acknowledge seek penance and it will not happen again, cheating and the spitting biting behaviour is what he is. worse he is unapologetic, and it is very likely to to happen again.

[Gamma]

maybe not a heavy foul nor as serious as Suarez made it out to be

this earned the opposing player a red card. THAT is not cheating? ask yuh breddah fi re-visit his definition of cheating fi mi deh .... HYPERcrite!

[Gamma]

"do anything to get his team an advantage" emphahsis on "any"!

[Paul Marin]

Anti-Suarez emotion tends to cloud judgment of reality. I don't think there is any dispute that Suarez over-reacted to that challenge but IMO it was a foul, maybe not a heavy foul nor as serious as Suarez made it out to be... but the ref had no choice but to blow.

I think it's important to distinguish between "simulation" and "over-reaction". In your clip of the foul by the Costa Rican against the American, that was clearly "simulation" whereas the Yotun incident with Suarez is "over-reaction". Neither of these acts are IMO admirable, I know you agree, but certainly "simulation" to get a free kick or get the opponent carded is really despicable.

The real question is: Is the ref influenced by over-reaction in what he awards? free kick only, or plus yellow or red card. One would think by now that any ref who is doing an international match should be aware of various antics that players will pull in order to influence them.

I didn't see a replay of the red card incident but I think you stated you didn't agree with the ref for handing out the red card... to which you were asked why you think it was awarded. You answered it and were called a "HYPERCRITE" for your troubles because Gamma didn't like your answer. I am guessing that's why he called you that but only he could explain.

I think someone else was lambasting South American refs for their bias which, if true, wouldn't apply in this case as the teams involved were both South American. Unless, of course, the ref has a bias towards Uruguay and against Perú.

The real culprit in all of this IMO, are the stewards of the game who refuse to clamp down on behaviour intended to mis-lead the ref. Is there an appeal process for people like Besly (sp) where the review panel can look at an incident and overturn the refs call (rescind a card) if needs be? If it cannot be established that there is grounds for reversal refs call would stand. It seems simple enough to me. At the same time if there is video (or other) evidence to demonstrate that the ref was fooled by "simulation", the "simulator" should be slapped with an automatic three match ban... or whatever is deemed appropriate.

There must be some way to eradicate the scourge of both simulation and over-reaction from the game.

Peter, spot on. Anti-Suarez sentiment makes otherwise sensible people into partisan jacks. Anyway, your question "Is the ref influenced by over-reaction in what he awards? free kick only, or plus yellow or red card" is a good fulcrum to explain the separate components to consider when analyzing an infraction.

Now, while I am sure that some refs do factor in the perceived level of pain inflicted on a player when dispensing punishment, they are not supposed to for good reason as Karl pointed out. In all these cases, there are two components to an infraction to consider - 1) the determination of whether a foul was committed (or not) and 2) the appropriate punishment, not unlike in criminal court, where the court first ascertains whether a crime has been committed before sentencing is passed. On the football field, here is how it can break down:

1. foul + "normal/appropriate" reaction
2. foul + over-reaction
3. no foul + over-reaction (i.e. simulation).

I am making no judgment on the "sentencing" aspect of the Suarez incident that lead to the red card, but no one can tell me that he wasn't fouled in both cases. I don't know if the ref used Suarez's reaction (or over-reaction) as a yard stick for dispensing punishment but that is not relevant to the fact that he was fouled. Punishment is a separate matter and again, as Karl pointed out, using a player's reaction to a foul is not supposed to be part of the equation when dispensing appropriate adjudication.

As for post-match judgment, I know they do it in the Prem, but whether they do it in FIFA WCQ I'm not sure. Had Beazler's red card been rescinded, he would have been available for yesterday, but he wasn't as far as I can tell leading me to believe that they probably don't do post match reviews in WCQ. Lastly, don't wait for the sport's governing body to do anything, it is in their best interest to keep things as they are - tief dem!

[DweetSweet]

You are all arguing an invalid point

Peru's Victor Yotin was shown a red card and sent off for violent conduct against Suarez, not for his foul on Luis Suarez. The violent conduct that quite rightly deserved a send off was that Yotun picked up the ball and threw it on to Suarez, striking him with the ball, and further compounded what is already violent conduct holding and pulling Suarez's right hand to pull him up, and then striking the Uruguayan player who approached Yotun and pushed him in his chest.

All of that is Violent Conduct according the the Laws of the Game.

As for the penalty call, it was correct. The Peruvian defender dick kick Suarez planted foot from behind, which if it occurs in the penalty area for a striker is a gift from gods that you have to accept. It does not matter if the kick resulted in minimal contact. The referee was well positioned, and would have seen it and heard the contact.

[Gamma]

funny, i was thinking the pro suarezites are complete apologists.

[Paul Marin]

maybe not a heavy foul nor as serious as Suarez made it out to be

this earned the opposing player a red card. THAT is not cheating? ask yuh breddah fi re-visit his definition of cheating fi mi deh .... HYPERcrite!

Excuse me - how do you know that Suarez's antics "earned the opposing player a red card"? Stick to facts please.

[Peter R]

Biting and "racially abusing" are two things... things that Suarez (and his team) has paid a price for. When it comes to the other stuff, emoting and all that tomfoolery IMO Suarez is not much different than a whole bag of players out there...not that that makes it any more acceptable to behave as if a two ton rock fell on your foot... so to key on Suarez as the poster boy of this behaviour is really just a reflection of your, and many others, hatred of Suarez from WC 2010. Anyway...

I have come to the conclusion that referees as a collective (my humble apologies Sir Karl as I do not include in this) are a bunch of retarded idiots and people like the Costa Rican Campbell, about whom there has been a deafening silence (but I suppose his name isn't Suarez) are the smart ones who take advantage of this mentally challenged group of individuals, who continue to be made fools of, at least IMO, over and over again.

[Tilla]

Paul, if not Suarez' s antics caused the sending off, then what then? Suare was not hurt buy the bump. For those who did not see it, here is the clip.

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=-JUOBSzWgJs

The second incident he was CLEARLY kneed in the hip. Ask anyone to stand behind you and put a knee in your hip bone and tell me you won't fall on the ground. Again, whether he over animated or not is irrelevant as that is impossible for you to determine unless you are wired into Suarez's neocortex. What is relevant is that the defender kneed him in the hip - PERIOD! Hence the infraction. As I said, it was to me a yellow, but the ref's decision to give a red has nothing to do with whether the player got kneed in his hip or not.

The above clip is the one where Paul says Suarez got kicked in the hip. I have included Paul's quote to see if he is really seeing straight. If you ask me, Suarez is a damn thief and Paul is on something.