Were you around at the club when we were deaing with Suarez? We recovered from that on multiple occassions so I assume we have protocols in place.
Yes, I was there. The precise details were fairly well-guarded so I don't have a great deal of extra insight to offer. What I will say is that Suarez was a very different (calmer) character off the pitch than on it. There wasn't a huge ego there and people generally liked him. All of the incidents on the pitch were generally dismissed as a product of his strong will to win (i.e. at all costs).
Obviously with Suarez there were multiple incidents.
1. Alleged racism to Patrice Evra. The club stood by his version of events so he was happy. We had to manage the fall-out with the wider footballing community, not the player. There would always be a tension with Man U anyway so after a while it didn't change a great deal and most (neutral) fans didn't know which version of events to believe anyway.
2. £40m + £1. His agent (Guardiola's brother) messed that up. I remember seeing the clause before the whole thing kicked off and my reading was that it only required us to notify him of any bids, not to accept them (which was what Gordon Taylor later confirmed when it all kicked off). We gave him a new contract with more money and a proper release clause so he was happy.
3. Biting Ivanovic - he accepted he was in the wrong, was heavily fined, didn't complain. This is what I mean when I talk about him being different off the field - in the moment he did something feral, but when he looked back on it he was genuinely remorseful.
4. Biting Chiellini - he got his move after that so didn't care, and we didn't have to negotiate a tricky path out of that one.
I think this incident is different, because I don't see Mo admitting that he was in the wrong, nor the club shifting the blame elsewhere. Plus with Suarez there was a motive for the club to get him back in the fold because he was getting better and better on the field, where Mo is in decline.