Luis Suarez has been in the headlines a lot this
week. He has recently been banned by the
FA for ten games, for biting an opponent in a match last week. He was previously banned for seven games in
2010 for biting, while at his former club Ajax.
There are several point to make in reaction to this.
1. Biting
is not appropriate on any sports field.
In football, it is classed as violent conduct, warranting a red card and
at least a three-match ban.
2. Players
sent off for violent conduct are often banned for more than three games by the
FA. Di Canio was banned for 11 games for
pushing a referee in 1998. Prutton was
banned for 10 games for the same offence in 2005. Thatcher got 8 games for elbowing Mendes in
2006. In most non-sporting professions,
such offences would warrant a sacking.
Why not in football?
3. This
is the longest ban a player has been given for violent conduct against another
player in England. The only longer bans
are for acts against referees, fans, or for drug offences. The exception is Joey Barton’s 12-game ban,
but that was for two counts of violent conduct rather than one. Why has this offence been given a
significantly longer ban than many other counts of violent conduct? What is inherently worse about biting than
stamping, spitting or headbutting?
4. Jermaine
Defoe bit an opponent in 2006 and was given no ban because the referee saw the
incident, and FIFA have a policy that means that players cannot be
retrospectively punished by football associations if the referee has already ‘dealt’
with the incident. This policy is
understandable, because they want to empower the referees. The policy is also laughable because the best
way to empower referees is with a system of TV replays and challenges, a system
that shows no signs of becoming available.
Referees should be able to use replays like in rugby, for incidents such
as infringements in the penalty area or when players are accused of something
like biting. Team captains should be
allowed, say, two challenges per half, like in tennis, to challenge decisions
like dives and offsides. I have made
this argument so many times, I am getting sick of it.
5. There
are two issues here – that of retrospective punishment, and that of the length
of Suarez’s ban. Much of the discussion
over the ban has been to do with consistency.
Why ten games, where similar incidents have warranted fewer? Is biting an opponent worse than racist
language but not as bad as pushing a referee?
Is this a longer ban because it is the second time he has bitten an
opponent? If so, why has this not been
clarified?
6. The
bottom line is that Suarez should be banned, but he should be banned in a way
consistent with other similar incidents.
On a related note, the way games are refereed needs to change, and has
needed to change for a while now.
