Excellent post
Bite, Nibble, Munch and Chomp
- Thread starter Red Astaire
- Start date
- Latest activity Latest activity:
Excellent post
There is a thread here that I missed with a vine of it
http://sixcrazyminutes.com/index.php?threads/elbow.50816/
Cheers, at most a three game ban. He looks like they are tussling and lashed out a little. Very different to the Suarez's bite, where he seemed to follow him with the intention of doing something unnatural on the field.
Why should the rest of the world be punished by watching England play for the actions of one man?
"Strange" that the Italian media have hardly mentioned it but the British press dont talk about anything else.
Not even their own shambolic WC campaign.
But the Italian media havent bothered that much. Yet he bit an Italian player and sent Italy out of the WC.
No one is defending him either but its already tiring that people dont talk about anything else.
Like the world have ended and he killed the entire Italian team.
Not even their own shambolic WC campaign.
But the Italian media havent bothered that much. Yet he bit an Italian player and sent Italy out of the WC.
No one is defending him either but its already tiring that people dont talk about anything else.
Like the world have ended and he killed the entire Italian team.
I watched it with a pub full of Italians and they were not arsed at all. They were far more upset with the red card they got.
There's definitely a bit of deflecting attention going on from the English media. They've never really liked him(some would say with good reason), and were always going to make a bigger deal of this than media elsewhere.
That doesn't mean what he did wasn't wrong, and that he shouldn't be punished relatively harshly for it.
I don't think that's at the base of it. As I said, the English hacks know that one of their own was sent to prison for biting someone. That stays in the memory and has a strong impact on their reading of such things. With Shepherd's conviction, some use it as a reference point: this is GBH, if you did it somewhere else you'd be charged for it and therefore it merits serious punishment by the football authorities. Others use it as a warning - don't condemn it and the Shepherd case will be brought up to embarrass you. But, one way or another, that, at heart, is why they react in the way that they do. The English hacks aren't using it to deflect attention from England's failure (if that's what you mean by deflecting). Why on earth would they do that? That's meat and drink to them - that's how they fill their pages.
Yeah, you're probably onto something. I'm just a little surprised they've gone out with a whimper and not much has been made of it. I mean Costa Rica topped the group, and England finished bottom. Maybe Hodgson's downplaying of their chances has worked.
It'll come, and then some!, but at the moment I think they're feeling a bit stymied by the lack of a strong alternative to Hodgson. If they absolutely blast him, as plenty want to do, they need to argue for someone else, and there isn't a realistic, available, candidate. But I'm sure they'll figure it out soon enough!
It's more than that - the press clamoured for an English manager, they supported Hodgson and so it's difficult for them to turn on him. The problem is that we've reached a point with England that all the obvious 'solutions' have been tried, and none of them work. That's because they're all fairly superficial fixes that don't actually address the root of the problem, and a big chunk of that is the way football is viewed, written about and generally consumed by your average joe and average journalist.
We're obsessed with individuals in football, which is why you have Shearer today writing that Rooney should be the next captain, and it's a complete anathema to the way it should be played. Look at Costa Rica, Uruguay, Chile, countries with populations a fraction the size of England, and yet able to pull together and establish a decent team at tournaments. England are incapable of doing that, in big part because we obsess about individuals. We think picking a squad is picking the best 23 players in the requisite positions, then putting them together in a formation that sounds vaguely up to date. We don't ever think 'How do we want to play', then 'What set up suits that' and then 'Which players suit that set up?' We don't even think 'We have shite defenders, so how can we set up a team that mitigates for that?' Chile have a Nottingham Forest defender playing out of position for them, for fuck's sake. We can't get that right because we can't move past the big stars. Fucking Rooney as captain. How about we decide how we want to play and whether Wayne Cunting Rooney fits within that before we start handing out the armband Alan you catastrophically stupid wanker.
It does my head in. The national conversation about football in England is, in the mainstream at least, so thuggishly primeval it's no wonder we can't even fucking pass the ball at a tournament.
You think ?
I think you may have a point there. The best teams aren't composed of the 11 best star players. The 1966 World Cup winning team contained Nobby Stiles who was a total brute. There was no more football in Nobby than a rabid dog, but he was a key part of a winning team.
Post of the week, right there.
Keni nailed it for me with his post a few pages back. No one is defending him at all. He is an idiot and is right back at square one after a fantastic year. He has let us down big time. I was furious when I first heard. (I've missed all three bites live btw 😉). The whole moral outrage is OTT though. I was chatting to a woman I worked with and she was incandescent with rage over it all. She informed me (as if I didn't know) that if I bit someone in work I'd be fired. I agreed. I'd also be fired if I lunged across the office and took a colleague out knee high or broke someone's jaw with an elbow in the canteen.
He didn’t seriously hurt someone, he didn’t take performance enhancement drugs, he didn’t participate in match fixing and to the best of my knowledge he isn’t a full blown Hannibal Lector either. That is in no way a defence of him. What he did was bizarre, ridiculous and a bit mental. It was his third time and in front of a billion people worldwide. He’s an absolute idiot. The majority of society has a buffer that stops us doing ‘mad things’. In the heat of the moment this buffer is tested but thankfully we can restrain ourselves from that moment of madness. Suarez has shown he can’t resist that impulsive action during high pressurised situations on the field of play. He deserves a lengthy ban and he will get it. Doing it three times also proves he can’t be trusted. I presume he is mortified and rightly so. He is a family man and perceived to be pretty normal in his day to day life but you can’t bite people once, never mind three times. I think the act of biting has a stigma attached to it as being an awful, scummy, animalistic, classless thing to do and I agree with that. It’s vicious and bizarre to see on the field of play. Kicking or elbowing someone is worse in my opinion as the potential injury is more severe but unfortunately both are now deemed part and parcel of our game. I’d rather be bitten on the shoulder than have my jaw or leg broken but that still doesn’t make it acceptable. I would find it absurd to be bitten on the field of play and I would react badly. If was punched in a pub I would fell aggrieved and be furious with the person who dealt the blow. I think I would be more ‘put out’ by a bite as it seems to be outside the perceived norms of societal behaviour.
To sum up, Suarez is an idiot for what he did, he deserves a ban but it isn’t the worst thing to happen in football as some would like us to believe.
He didn’t seriously hurt someone, he didn’t take performance enhancement drugs, he didn’t participate in match fixing and to the best of my knowledge he isn’t a full blown Hannibal Lector either. That is in no way a defence of him. What he did was bizarre, ridiculous and a bit mental. It was his third time and in front of a billion people worldwide. He’s an absolute idiot. The majority of society has a buffer that stops us doing ‘mad things’. In the heat of the moment this buffer is tested but thankfully we can restrain ourselves from that moment of madness. Suarez has shown he can’t resist that impulsive action during high pressurised situations on the field of play. He deserves a lengthy ban and he will get it. Doing it three times also proves he can’t be trusted. I presume he is mortified and rightly so. He is a family man and perceived to be pretty normal in his day to day life but you can’t bite people once, never mind three times. I think the act of biting has a stigma attached to it as being an awful, scummy, animalistic, classless thing to do and I agree with that. It’s vicious and bizarre to see on the field of play. Kicking or elbowing someone is worse in my opinion as the potential injury is more severe but unfortunately both are now deemed part and parcel of our game. I’d rather be bitten on the shoulder than have my jaw or leg broken but that still doesn’t make it acceptable. I would find it absurd to be bitten on the field of play and I would react badly. If was punched in a pub I would fell aggrieved and be furious with the person who dealt the blow. I think I would be more ‘put out’ by a bite as it seems to be outside the perceived norms of societal behaviour.
To sum up, Suarez is an idiot for what he did, he deserves a ban but it isn’t the worst thing to happen in football as some would like us to believe.
Very good post by @Best Believe It
I'm surprised people deny it. I'm defending him, absolutely.
People are saying he deserves huge world wide bans, and I'm defending him from that, cos I think they're wrong.
Similar threads
