The hysterical reaction to the
forward's four-month ban is understandable,
given Pepe's previous misdemeanours were not
considered when he was sanctioned
Jun 30, 2014 10:15:00 AM
By Mark Doyle in Brazil
"It's a breach of human
rights ... barbarity,"
according to Diego Lugano.
"They might as well
handcuff him and throw him in Guantanamo,"
fumed Diego Maradona.
It's fair to say that the reaction to Luis Suarez's
suspension for biting Giorgio Chiellini during
Uruguay's World Cup win over Italy last week has
been ridiculously over the top. Rational analysis of
the severity of the ban has been difficult amidst
such hysteria.
However, while the hyperbolic views of Lugano
and Maradona would be laughable were they not
so offensive to those whose human rights are
actually being violated on a daily basis across the
globe, there is no denying that a not insignificant
number of people within football believe the ban
to be "excessive".
Indeed, what those defending the four-month
suspension from all "football-related activity"
seem to find even more stupefying than the fact
that Suarez has bitten an opponent for a third
time, is the groundswell of support for the
forward, which extends beyond the boundaries of
his native Uruguay.
However, while the striker's crime is as
indefensible as it is inexplicable, the argument
that he has been treated differently to his peers is
understandable - because he has been.
Nobody is disputing the fact that Suarez deserved
to be sanctioned. Banning a repeat offender for
four months for biting could not normally be
considered excessive, as it is a reprehensible act
worthy of a significant suspension. But in this
instance it could be argued that the punishment is
too severe, and the issue is the inconsistency.
Firstly, there is the fact that Suarez's suspension
extends beyond international football. Not only
will he miss his country's next nine competitive
fixtures, he will also be unavailable to his club,
Liverpool, until the end of October. That move was
motivated by the fact that this is Suarez's third
offence. The argument goes that they had to send
a clear message that something as contemptible
as biting is simply not acceptable within the game.
Consequently, they came down hard on Suarez.
Which is truly fair enough ... except for the fact
that they blindly chose to ignore previous
misdemeanours when it came to considering how
long to suspend Pepe for after the defender was
dismissed during Portugal's 4-0 loss to Germany.
Pepe's career has been characterised by random
acts of aggression - yet he was only ordered to
serve the mandatory one-game ban for
headbutting Thomas Muller. Why was Suarez's rap
sheet taken into account - and not Pepe's? Of
course, Fifa found Suarez had exhibited a
disturbing and complete absence of "any
contrition or repentance" (Suarez's claim that he
simply "lost his balance" insulted the intelligence
of not only the victim, Chiellini, and Fifa's
disciplinary committe, but everyone who
witnessed it) but then, Pepe maintains that he did
not deserve a red.
Furthermore, Cameroon midfielder Alex Song's
suspension for a similarly unprovoked assault on
Croatia forward Mario Mandzukic was extended to
a total three games, thus ending his World Cup.
Why? Why was Pepe only banned for only one
game for 'violent conduct', and Song three?
Particularly when the latter openly admitted his
guilt and expressed heartfelt remorese.
The inconsistencies in the Pepe and Song cases are
staggering so it is hardly surprising then, that
there is a growing sense that there is one rule for
the more powerful nations - and one rule for the
rest. And that is why there has been uproar in
Uruguay. Is there anger misplaced? Yes, of
course, their fury should be directed at the man
that let them down on the biggest stage of all.
And it is embarrasing to hear people talk of the
English media having a vendetta against Suarez,
last season's Football Writers' Player of the Year.
But those claiming Suarez has been made a
scapegoat are not without reason.
Biting, of course, is a particularly savage and
cowardly act and it has no place in the game. Fifa
were, therefore, well within their rights to make
an example of Suarez. But football has more
pressing and more prevalent problems to solve, so
can we now expect to see them addressed in such
refreshingly firm fashion?
There are, after all, players and coaches who have
spent less than four months on the touchline for
doping or involvement in match-fixing. And will
Fifa now finally tackle the issue of 'simulation',
one of the scourges of the modern game? Arjen
Robben has admitted that he dived during
Netherlands' last-16 win over Mexico on Sunday.
We are often told that it is so hard to prove a
player has intentionally attempted to deceive the
referee so, now that we have a public confession,
surely this is an open-and-shut case? Surely
Robben should be sanctioned? Particularly as it
could be argued that he, too, has 'previous'.
Even more importantly, when exactly is Fifa going
to finally take a strong stand in the fight against
racism? When are we going to see clubs fined
more than a few thousand euro for incidents
racial abuse within their stadia?
All we really have at the moment is the well-
meaning 'Say No to Racism' campaign but the
powers that be are presently in no position to talk
about issues of inequality given how inconsistently
it is dealing with indiscipline.

Surez deserves his suspension, not his first time. Remember ferdinand was suspended for 9 months for missing routine urinary test after a match.

FIFA are not been fair at all. Suarez should have been given up to 8months ban

Overblown jor. A simple red card with 3 game ban should do. It's not as if it was a career threatening bite.

johnwizey: FIFA are not been fair at all. Suarez should have been given up to 8months ban

the problem here is FIFA's inconsistency, if there is a standard, let it apply to all

yoji: Overblown jor. A simple red card with 3 game ban should do. It's not as if it was a career threatening bite.

career threatening bite. which do you prefer,a bike or a kick with a football boot?

majamajic: Surez deserves his suspension, not his first time. Remember ferdinand was suspended for 9 months for missing routine urinary test after a match.

how about John Terry, he was simply let go.inconsistency in handing out discipline