Ghana v Uruguay

[6ft Kerplunk]

At least Suarez made the save. His teammate in front of him flapped at it like Kerplunk Jnr trying to catch a tennis ball. As both committed the same offence why didn't the ref send both off?

[Flyingkiwi]

OK. Emotive language (the C word) aside, I think we can agree that it was a "professional foul" which, in many codes including football, elicit harsher punishment. The standard for a red card at this world cup is a one match ban and I don't think that is fair.
Compare the Aussie that got sent off for handling on the line and Suarez. Totally different but each gets exactly the same punishment. I'm not saying most of us wouldn't have done the same thing so I'm not criticising Suarez for doing it, I just think that infraction deserves a harsher punishment; not because it denied Ghana a goal but because it was so blatantly pre-concieved (and the fact that he has boasted about it afterwaed doesn't help).

To my mind, a 2 match ban is fair because it will affect him personally by ending his World Cup. That is "taking one for the team"!

[Ian Royal]

OK. Emotive language (the C word) aside, I think we can agree that it was a "professional foul" which, in many codes including football, elicit harsher punishment. The standard for a red card at this world cup is a one match ban and I don't think that is fair.
Compare the Aussie that got sent off for handling on the line and Suarez. Totally different but each gets exactly the same punishment. I'm not saying most of us wouldn't have done the same thing so I'm not criticising Suarez for doing it, I just think that infraction deserves a harsher punishment; not because it denied Ghana a goal but because it was so blatantly pre-concieved (and the fact that he has boasted about it afterwaed doesn't help).

To my mind, a 2 match ban is fair because it will affect him personally by ending his World Cup. That is "taking one for the team"!

Blatant cynical cheating of that nature should be punished by the player's expulsion from the World Cup IMO. Along with feigning injury to get an opposition player sent off.

[Archie's penalty]

Disagree. It wasn't pre-concieved, the ball flew at him quickly and he instinctively stopped the ball with his hand. Remember he had stopped the first shot with his foot. His post penalty actions deserve a fine though.

[Maguire]

Totally different but each gets exactly the same punishment

Well they're not totally different, they're the same offence in the laws of the game. Handball on the line, denied a clear goalscoring opportunity, sent off, penalty, ban. That's it. Saying it was "blatantly pre-conceived" is a bit ridiculous when the whole incident occured in a split second. He reacted how he reacted and got punished for it.

I also don't think the fact that it was in the last minute (thus denying Uruguay a player for one second rather than eg. one hour) is relevant. Offences shouldn't incur variable punishment due to which point in the game they take place in. Suarez has lost his place in the semi-finals and the reason they didn't get knocked out of the WC altogether is because Gyan couldn't hit the target with a free shot from 12 yards. Done and done.

[RoyalChicagoFC]

A second Uruguay man on the line was indeed guilty of attempted volleyball as 6ft'erz notes

WRT what kiwi said, I've kicked around the general concept of a three-tiered cautions system:

--Yellow for stuff like playing on after the whistle; kicking the ball away; cynical fouling to stop counterattacks in their tracks; time-wasting; dissent (to a point)
--Orange for bad tackles that don't rise to the level of a sending off and a match ban; blatant diving
--Red for violent conduct, utterly reckless tackles, deliberate handball in the area

Card accumul7ion is problematic, and particularly so in the restricted confines of a tournament the like of this one (and in Euros from now on, what with the 24-team format and the addition of a knockout round --and in any case, I don't know of a single instance of FIFA rescinding after the fact a ticky-tack yellow card needlessly brandished)

Of course, this notion of mine would give a referee and assistants more decisions to make, so never mind --if OTOH they were infallible automatons who could make decisions in real time...

[6ft Kerplunk]

To my mind, a 2 match ban is fair because it will affect him personally by ending his World Cup. That is "taking one for the team"!

FIFA do have the option to look at red card offenses and decide whether the one match ban is sufficient and extend it if they see fit.

[brendywendy]

Disagree. It wasn't pre-concieved, the ball flew at him quickly and he instinctively stopped the ball with his hand. Remember he had stopped the first shot with his foot. His post penalty actions deserve a fine though.

both of the players on the line were clearly intent on keeping it out however it happened

[brendywendy]

i believe that there should be a distinction between what would have been a clear goal scoring opportunity, and what would have been a clear goal, which this was

[Maguire]

i believe that there should be a distinction between what would have been a clear goal scoring opportunity, and what would have been a clear goal, which this was

All goalline handballs would've been a goal, surely?

[Ian Royal]

i believe that there should be a distinction between what would have been a clear goal scoring opportunity, and what would have been a clear goal, which this was

All goalline handballs would've been a goal, surely?

But not all goal line handballs that are given are undisputably intentional. Not all fouls preventing a clear goalscoring opportunity would result in guaranteed goal.

[Flyingkiwi]

Totally different but each gets exactly the same punishment

Well they're not totally different, they're the same offence in the laws of the game. Handball on the line, denied a clear goalscoring opportunity, sent off, penalty, ban. That's it. Saying it was "blatantly pre-conceived" is a bit ridiculous when the whole incident occured in a split second. He reacted how he reacted and got punished for it.

I also don't think the fact that it was in the last minute (thus denying Uruguay a player for one second rather than eg. one hour) is relevant. Offences shouldn't incur variable punishment due to which point in the game they take place in. Suarez has lost his place in the semi-finals and the reason they didn't get knocked out of the WC altogether is because Gyan couldn't hit the target with a free shot from 12 yards. Done and done.

They're the same offence only inasmuch as they were both handball on the line. In the case of the Aussie, a "clear goalscoring opportunity" is debatable as the ball more hit him than the other way around but that was certainly not the case with Suarez but whatever.

I don't think that when the incident happened has any relevance and I;ve never said that it did. His one match ban will take him out of the semi-finals; I think it should be a 2 match ban and finish his World Cup/

It will make a total mockery of all of FIFA;s Fair Play initiatives if we see Saurez doing a lap of honour with the World Cup if Uruguay end up winning won't it?

[Maguire]

i believe that there should be a distinction between what would have been a clear goal scoring opportunity, and what would have been a clear goal, which this was

All goalline handballs would've been a goal, surely?

But not all goal line handballs that are given are undisputably intentional. Not all fouls preventing a clear goalscoring opportunity would result in guaranteed goal.

That's two different things you're trying to say there.

If you compare eg. Kewell's and Suarez's, both stopped a goal. Same as any goalline handball stops a goal. So i'm not sure how brendy would like to distinguish between them.

[Ian Royal]

haven't seen either handball, but judging by comments on here one was obviously deliberate and the other wasn't. I took Brendy's comments to be more general than just those two incidents anyway.

[Archie's penalty]

YOU'VE NOT EVEN SEEN THE INCIDENT!!!! WTF!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rneYzSTb ... re=related

Now I know why everyone gets angry at you for making assumptions based on nothing.

[brendywendy]

i believe that there should be a distinction between what would have been a clear goal scoring opportunity, and what would have been a clear goal, which this was

All goalline handballs would've been a goal, surely?

yes, thats why it should be different from a foul in the box for example, as that just stops an opportunity to score- so getting a penalty is fair cos thats what you are giving him back
giving someone opportunity to score again when it was a clear goal just doesnt strike me as fair, but i guess: boo hoo, oh well.


sometimes its unclear if it was handball at all, or if it was whether it was in any way intentional or just ball to hand.
in this instance it was undebateable. though for a one in a hundred thousand event is it worth a change in the rules, probably no.

[Ian Royal]

YOU'VE NOT EVEN SEEN THE INCIDENT!!!! WTF!!!!

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rneYzSTb ... re=related

Now I know why everyone gets angry at you for making assumptions based on nothing.

But I'm not talking about the incident I'm talking about the issues that it has raised.

Whether Suarez's handball was unbelievably blatant or not and Kewell's was clearly accidental or not does not change an opinion on what should be done in circumstances where a handball is blatant and stops a definite goal as opposed to one which may have been accidental, or a foul which stopped a goalscoring chance.

I don't need to have seen Moat shoot people to have an opinion on the punishment for different degrees of shooting people.

That's a cracker though!

[Archie's penalty]

Watching that again are the two Ghana players offside after Pantsil's initial header? They are the two players who went on to have the next shot and the final header. Surely that means it shouldn't have even got to the stage where Suarez handballed it?

[SLAMMED]

They are indeed.

[PEARCEY]

Watching that again are the two Ghana players offside after Pantsil's initial header? They are the two players who went on to have the next shot and the final header. Surely that means it shouldn't have even got to the stage where Suarez handballed it?

Fair point Archibald. You are correct(although the dimwit alert still applies).