What an odd question.
The things i’ve defined as cheating are explicitly and clearly outlawed in the rules of the game.
By your standards, using a corked bat in baseball is not cheating, because the rules allow for a specific punishment.
The rules say that it’s cheating! That isn’t even in question. Uruguay decided that it could handle being cheaters cause the punishment wasn’t strict enough.
I hope Uruguay get thrashed!
That’s not cheating that’s football. Suarez did what he had to; sacrificed himself for his team knowing full well he’d be red-carded. Want to “blame” someone, blame Asamoah – he had it from the spot kick to put his team through.
And this comes from someone who’s not exactly a South American footy fan.
They’re actually not. But they count for a lot more.
The difference to me is that a person using a corked bat is trying to avoid taking the punishment, and is therefore attempting to act outside the rules of the game. Henry cheated against Ireland, Maradona cheated in '86, the Ivory Coast guy cheated to get Kaka sent off. This guy didn’t cheat.
Poor Gyan, this will hound him.
Well, something has come up and I am going to miss the following matches. I hope I am back for the final. Till then, ¡mucha suerte! Veel succes!
The rules also say if you play the ball beyond the end line the other team gets a corner. Conceding a corner, then, is cheating that I can handle “cause the punishment wasn’t strict enough.”
mhendo, a corked bat is defined by the attempt to avoid detection, not the attempt to accept the penalty for using a corked bat. A foul to give up free throws is defined by the explicit attempt to accept the consequences.
I think you are making some pretty sweeping generalizations when you say that’s the difference between America and everyone else.
Oh grrrrr, he behaved badly when he received the red too, what, like he thought he’d get away with it. Well, others have so …
Anyway - seconded - poor Gyan
I assumed the tone of the sentence made it clear I was being hyperbolic, Sorry.
Its not cheating. Everybody followed the rules, Suarez got his punishment. It’s only cheating if there’s no punishment.
It was a professional foul. Which, for better or worse, is a BIG BIG part of football.
I’m guessing most people who say it is cheating have never actually played football?
Because every defender knows that if a guy is through on goal, in the last minute, you take him down, get a red card.
If the other team are breaking quickly, your man beats you and is away, you take him down. Yellow card.
Most teams I have played for have positioned someone just outside the box on attacking corners. Their job is to get the ball back into the box if it is cleared their direction, or if any defenders try to break with the ball, his job is to take them down, get a yellow, and give everyone a chance to get back in position. Once he is booked someone else takes over that role.
The point is, once you get to even a semi-decent level of football, this “cheating” is rampant. Its all very well armchair enthusiasts being outraged, but 99% of players would have done the same, and the one percent who wouldn’t would have been letting down their team-mates.
It’s a cheat not just because it’s just against one rule. But it’s a flant of many rules and the entire spirit of the beautiful game.
For instance a handball is a foul, a deliberate handball is a serious foul and a deliberate handball that robs the opposing team of an obvious goal is a very serious foul. Add to fact the punishment involves sending the player out of the game and that this was the end of the game makes the punishment totally irrelevant. Add that to the fact the goal that was robbed from Ghana was a winning goal makes this a farce!
The Uruguayans knew that this was cheating and bad sportsmanship and decided that this was okay. They can go screw for this. I hope they lose!
Huh?
I assume you’re talking about the Hand of God goal?
That was no more or less intentional than today’s handball. The only difference between the two is that Maradona’s was missed by the referee, while today’s was not.
Here’s a hypothetical for you: if the referee had somehow managed to miss Suarez’s handball today (and, from the replays, it looked like he might have gotten the call from the assistant referee), do you think Suarez would have walked up to him and said, “Hey, i kept it out with my hand. You should send me off and award a penalty kick”?
If your answer to that is “no,” then surely Suarez cheated just as much as Maradona did. Does the cheating depend, for you, on whether or not the official sees the infraction? Because that would be a pretty bizarre definition of cheating.
It is?
Remember, you’re the one brought “the rules” into this, so lets looks at the MLB rules to see where the attempt to avoid detection is part of the definition of a corked bat.
Rule 6.06 (d):
Hmmm…
The commenter at the BBC website said it is not cheating, but that is just one person’s interpretation. He also lambasted FIFA for not having an awarded goal option for the referee there.
Assuming “hmmm” is the sound of you thinking, keep at it. A corked bat is only advantageous if you’re allowed to use it. True or false? You’re only allowed to use it if you don’t get caught. True or false?
The advantage to Uruguay existed whether or not Suarez got away with the handball. True or false?
I was pretty much a neutral in this game, but if a team I supported were defending a level score at the end of a knock-out round match, and if in the final minute the other side had a clear shot on goal that couldn’t be stopped on the line by a defender without him sticking out an arm (or flapping it away like Suarez did) … I would hope that the defender WOULD commit handball, knowing that he’d be sent off and we’d have to face a penalty.
Like carm and others have pointed out, that’s football. Sometimes a player has to sacrifice himself for his team by committing a foul, risking a yellow or a red. It’s better to do that than to risk giving up a certain goal, particularly if it’s the final minute of extra time in a World Cup quarterfinal.
I agree with Octopus.
The problem there, quite obviously, is with the RULE, not what any player did. Suarez was perfectly right to knock the ball away with his hand. Suarez was not put on his nation’s team and sent to South Africa to be a nice guy, he was sent there to win the World Cup. It’s his job to help win the game, not make fans of other nations happy. What he did was perfectly within the rules, and he accepted the outcome; you didn’t see him spend two minutes pissing and moaning that he hadn’t touched the ball with his hand. And in any event, it’s not like in the scramble you could expect the man to balance the issues of sportsmanship versus interpretations of the hand ball rule and consider precedent and what happened at the Cup in blah blah blah; he just reacted. See ball, stop ball.
It strikes me as being amazingly obvious that the rulebook is seriously flawed. If a hand ball prevents what would otherwise have been a goal beyond any doubt or question, a goal should be awarded. Other sports have similar rules, why can’t soccer?
Have you ever played football? I find it hard to believe that someone who has would have this attitude.
Yes but those games weren`t invented by the English: they have a curious notion about what fair play means and they are pissed off at the rest of the world because they suck in every major sport they invented 
One of those did not involve deliberately hurting another player.