The Official Broadcaster of the 2010 FIFA World Cup South Africa™

Spain wins World Cup

Expert Blogs

July 2, 2010 6:49 PM Bookmark and Share

Suarez: Hero or cheat?

So, Luis Suarez: sneaky cheat who prospered at the expense of innocent men or brave hero who fell on his sword?
 
The answer, as with so many questions, probably depends on who you support. There probably isn't a right answer, but right now, in the immediate aftermath of Uruguay's passage into the semifinal, there are countless questions.

Here are a few of them, and some tentative responses -- some random thoughts thrown into the mix, to chew over, debate about, as we continue to digest an extraordinary quarter-final.

One way to look at it is to compare what happened tonight to what infamously happened in Paris in the winter.

Is what Luis Suarez did as bad as what Thierry Henry did for France against Ireland?

Of course it's not. Henry got away with it.

But isn't it a bit perverse to judge an action -- especially morally, ethically -- on the basis of the reaction rather than the action itself?

Does not getting caught make committing murder worse than killing someone and getting caught?

Of course it's not as bad as Henry. Suarez knew the consequences. He actually played by the rules. He willingly traded a goal for a red card and a penalty. He misses the semifinal, a selfless sacrifice for his team.

So, would it have been any more cheating if the referee had failed to see it? And if he really was offering a trade and falling on his sword, does that mean he would have owned up and taken his punishment? Would he, like a repentant sinner, turned himself in?

If so, if not, does that change the act itself?

And should the rule be changed? In a situation like this should a goal just be awarded? It's not Suarez's fault the law is an ass. If it's an ass.

He was punished. And he took his punishment. Henry didn't. But did anyone really expect Henry to own up? Especially during the game? Does any player? Ever?

It's not his fault either that Gyan then missed. He gave Ghana the chance. He thought he'd given them the win. His tears showed that. But he hadn't. He's subsequent celebration showed that.

And shouldn't he have shown some contrition, some shame? Instead of glorying in his crime.

But why? His team was reborn. He'd gone from national villain, the man who cost his team -- after all, maybe he didn't need to do it, he could perhaps have headed the ball away -- to national hero who saved them in blink of an eye.  

Of course it's worse than what Henry did. This was more blatant. And more important. There was a semifinal at sake. And it was the very last act of the game. After Henry's goal Ireland still had a chance to win the game.

But then so did Ghana. They could have scored their penalty. They could have scored their penalties.  

And aren't they just peripheral factors, not central to the act, the handball, itself? Was it really more important? Or was it less? And does that matter?

And, anyway, was what Henry did really that bad? Was what Suarez did? Don't players break the rules all the time? Deliberately, too. Whether by hand or by foot.

Wouldn't we all do what he did? Would we?

And did Suarez really do what he did consciously? Did he mean to cheat? Or did he just react? And does that make any difference? The victims hurt just as much? Does that matter either?

Luis Suarez: sneaky cheat who prospered at the expense of innocent men or brave hero who fell on his sword?
 
You decide.
  •  
 
Adidas Chevrolet Rogers CIBC Coca-Cola Budweiser