Suarez, cheater or heros ?
in [World Football]
|
From: jvazquez on 2 Jul 2010 19:25 IMO, it' s not the best for football the hand of Suarez, but it was within the laws of football. It was a fault, there was a penalty awarded and a red card. There was no justice, though. But Ghana didn't know how to win the game, although they tried and deserved it. Uruguay did know how to win and also deserved it. It was a close game. Dura lex, sed lex. Juan Vazquez
From: JCQ on 2 Jul 2010 19:28 On Jul 2, 7:05 pm, Mike Hall <tar...(a)yahoo.com> wrote: > If one deliberately break the rules, one is cheating. End of. Take > up the argument with the English language. Breaking the rules is just that. Do you think every foul is cheating? By your definition cheating happens in every single match all the time. Why is what Suarez did worse than teams that commit twice as many fouls as the opponent and get away with it? What about the players that pretend they were hit in the face when it was just a touch? Did the Mexicans cheat by continually fouling Messi? I don't think any of that is cheating. It's just part of the game. If someone breaks the rules the ref should be there to call whatever needs to be called. In this case he did so justice was done and there is nothing to complain about.
From: Evan Kirshenbaum on 2 Jul 2010 20:42 SHUSSBAR <shussbar(a)gmail.com> writes: > Suarez vs. Henry : > > Both used their hands > Both used their hands : one to get some help to control the ball that > lead to a goal, the other one to get some help to stop a ball that > prevented a goal. > At the end, it can be be argued that they both prevented another team > to advance further in the competition. To my mind, there's a huge difference that makes one cheating (or at least damn lucky) and the other simply good clean tactics. To my mind, it's not cheating if (1) you don't attempt to injure someone and (2) you don't try to hide it but rather have decided that it is tactically advantageous to get caught and take the penalty according to the rules. It's no different from an intentional walk in baseball, deliberately taking a delay of game penalty in football, or intentionally fouling at the end of a basketball game to put the other team at the foul line and stop the clock (even when this means fouling out of the game). The only difference is that in this case the mandated penalty is so severe (playing a man down, losing him for the next game, and giving up an *almost* certain goal) that it takes a much more extreme set of circumstances to make it worthwhile. Such as stopping a certain goal in the last minute of overtime in a tied game in an elimination tournament. If he had argued or tried to hide it or pretended he hadn't done it, that would have been a different story. But here he was clearly thinking "The only way to prevent us losing is to block the shot with my hands, and if I do he *might* miss the PK". -- Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |To find the end of Middle English, 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |you discover the exact date and Palo Alto, CA 94304 |time the Great Vowel Shift took |place (the morning of May 5, 1450, kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com |at some time between neenuh fiftehn (650)857-7572 |and nahyn twenty-fahyv). | Kevin Wald http://www.kirshenbaum.net/
From: M DG on 3 Jul 2010 00:21 No, I don't believe I'd consider him a "cheater". Yes he used his hand to block the ball, but he was also red carded and Ghana was given a penalty shot. Henry is a perfect comparison. I consider neither of them cheaters, in the Henry case the referee just missed the call. There is a good chance he at least had some idea in his mind of what he was doing, he knew it was against the rules, yet he did it anyways and accepted the punishment. How is this any different from a player who scores from an offside position and the referee misses. Maybe he does so unknowingly but what if he knows. Take Tevez's goal vs. Mexico, clearly offside and he even admitted to the media after the game that he knew he was offside. It's not like Tevez ran over to the referee to correct his mistake. To those who call Suarez a cheater you could call Tevez one, and just about every other player at some point or another. Some people have been comparing this to going out there and blatantly and/or flagrantly injuring a member of the opposing team. To me it's not even the same case. In one case, a player is knowingly blocking a goal in attempt to save the game. In another, a player is going outside the bounds of the game itself in an attempt to injure another player. That may just be my opinion, and players have gone after other players before in an attempt to injure them. You could argue that is a far more serious form of cheating than Suarez's rather (comparatively) benign offense.
From: Evan Kirshenbaum on 3 Jul 2010 02:22
Mike Hall <tarrow(a)yahoo.com> writes: > On 3 July, 00:01, JCQ <zelig9...(a)gmail.com> wrote: >> It's amazing that people still complain about cheating. It's up to >> the ref to decide that and to get the calls right. The players will >> try to get away with as much as they can because the opponents >> would do the same if given the chance. What Suarez did was part of >> the game. He had no choice but to use his hands. It was very clear >> but if the ref somehow misses it and doesn't call a penalty it's >> still not cheating. > > If one deliberately break the rules, one is cheating. End of. Take > up the argument with the English language. No, hoping to gain an advantage by breaking without getting penalized is cheating. There are (in pretty much every game) so many worse case of actually trying to get away with doing things the rules say should be penalized that I really don't think people have much call to apply the word to somebody who made a tactical decision that the penalty was better for his team than what would have happened if he had not "committed the offence" (in the language of the LotG). I'm thinking about things like - pretending to be injured or to have been tripped (should be a yellow every time). - grabbing an opponent (free kick). Along with spitting at an opponent the only one of the FK offences that you can do to an opponent that doesn't require that the referee decide that you did it carelessly, recklessly, or with excessive force. It's mandatorily a yellow for USB if it prevents a player from getting the ball or "taking up an advantageous position". - moving the wall forward (yellow card for "failure to respect the required distance") or just waiting near the ball until the referee tells you to move back. - deliberately wasting time when ahead at the end of the game (e.g., unnecessary substitutions, walking slowly off the field.) - hoping to get future calls by complaining to the referee when he doesn't agree with you that contact warranted a free kick or a card. (Should probably be a yellow for dissent in many cases, or USB when you know good and well that it wasn't as bad as you're making it out.) Those are all things that are much more clearly "cheating" in my mind, because they only benefit you if you don't get penalized. -- Evan Kirshenbaum +------------------------------------ HP Laboratories |Code should be designed to make it 1501 Page Mill Road, 1U, MS 1141 |easy to get it right, not to work Palo Alto, CA 94304 |if you get it right. kirshenbaum(a)hpl.hp.com (650)857-7572 http://www.kirshenbaum.net/ |