Skip to content

Suarez to appeal “fascist” suspension to Court of Arbitration of Sport

Jul 11, 2014, 11:30 AM EDT

Italy v Uruguay: Group D - 2014 FIFA World Cup Brazil Getty Images

It will be said that Luis Suarez went down for a bite, but not without a fight.

One day after FIFA rejected the Barcelona striker’s appeal against a four-month ban for biting Italy’s Giorgio Chiellini during the World Cup, Suarez’s lawyer has confirmed his client will take the only other step available by appealing his suspension to the Court of Arbitration of Sport.

[ MORE: Liverpool, Suarez confirm striker is leaving Anfield for Barcelona ]

[ MORE: Where does the crazy $128 million Suarez transfer fee rank all-time? ]

And he’s using some mighty strong accusatory language.

From the BBC:

As part of the ban, Suarez cannot train with his club and is prohibited from entering the confines of any stadium, although players’ union Fifpro argues the details “lack clarity”.

“[It] is blatantly draconian, totalitarian and fascist,” Balbi told Spanish radio station Cope.

“The right of a footballer to work is being violated, and football should be worried about that. The nine international games may seem excessive, but the fact that he can’t watch a game of football, or train or carry out his job – we are talking about unpleasant things.”

Ordinarily, Cas would sit and hear the matter while the player adhered to the terms of his ban.

However, as the World Cup is still taking place, Suarez’s legal team could apply to the Cas ‘ad-hoc’ division, which exists for the duration of the tournament to hear matters such as this.

“Look, my guy bit a dude during a sporting event for the third time after severe suspensions for the first and second bite, proving those lengths didn’t teach any lessons, and you’re going to punish him with a more severe ban? BLACKSHIRTS!”

It’s not being reduced.

  1. lyleoross - Jul 11, 2014 at 11:41 AM

    In one sense, Suarez has a point, his bite, while sick, is relatively minor compared to a cynical challenge that shatters another player’s leg, and possibly damages their career. And yet his bites(s) are being treated more seriously, and the reason why is that they strike us in a visceral sense. They are considered outside the norm. The question needs to be asked, why are we treating dangerous challenges that do serious damage to another player as part of the normal lexicon of soccer/football? Why is what Suarez did so much more harmful (based on the punishment) than what Zuniga did to Neymar? Keep in mind that what Zuniga did was on purpose. Suarez acted on impulse out of frustration. Yes, he acted like a three year old, but still, his action wasn’t premeditated and could not do near the damage that a knee to the back or cleat to the knee can do.

    Suarez clearly has a problem, and it needs to be dealt with. But FIFA has a bigger problem, they are letting players damage the sport with cynical challenges that should be punished at a much higher level. Until they do this, I have to agree with Suarez as much as I might dislike him.

  2. bellerophon30 - Jul 11, 2014 at 11:54 AM

    It’s hard to get mad about the lawyer’s approach, because their just doing what all lawyer’s do: Say anything, no matter how ridiculous, to get their client off, or at least get a reduced sentence. Same with the union, or whatever it is, though they don’t seem terribly concerned about the welfare of the guys he bites.

    But this is a third offense, and as a few commentators have pointed out, a third offense of the same crime usually gets you put in jail. He’s not being put in jail, he’s just getting a four month unpaid vacation, during which he can hire a personal trainer to keep himself fit, and it’ll let his body rest from the long season and summer he just completed. Yes, he’ll take a hit financially, but he should remember this the next time HE WANTS TO PUT HIS MOUTH ON ANOTHER PLAYER!!!!

    Save the biting for your wife Luis, and learn a lesson.

  3. rmccleary97 - Jul 11, 2014 at 12:08 PM

    Fascist … people keep using that word. I do not think that word means what they think it means.

    • lyleoross - Jul 11, 2014 at 12:17 PM

      Suarez is focusing on the part of the definition that reads “authoritarian leadership that cannot be questioned,” and in that sense, he is somewhat correct. FIFA is fairly authoritarian and pretty much intolerant of questioning.

  4. soisaid2 - Jul 11, 2014 at 12:30 PM

    Agreed….. What happen to neymar deserves a serious punishment. Way more dangerous than a bite, though the bite is more outlandish.

  5. dkalev - Jul 11, 2014 at 12:58 PM

    Okay, so what happened to James Rodriguez for 55 minutes deserves a big punishment as well.

Leave Comment

You must be logged in to leave a comment. Not a member? Register now!

Featured video

Premier League, Week 3 review