Group D: Uruguay, Costa Rica, England, Italy

[Uppercut]

I don't understand why you think a legal appeal would work? Is it so different from Asif and Amir being banned from domestic cricket too?

I think you would need a precedent to argue that a ban was excessive, and there is none for someone biting players 3 times.

 

[GIMH]

I don't understand why you think a legal appeal would work? Is it so different from Asif and Amir being banned from domestic cricket too?

I think you would need a precedent to argue that a ban was excessive, and there is none for someone biting players 3 times.

It's more the fact they've given Liverpool no right of appeal. That's where I think they'd have a case.

 

[sledger]

It's more the fact they've given Liverpool no right of appeal. That's where I think they'd have a case.

Which court would hear this case though? An English court would have no jurisdiction to quash a decision of an international organisation that has basically nil presence in the UK.

Edit: In any case, even if an English court was to hear it, they'd only be able to judicially review FIFA's decision, which means they'd only be able to consider whether or not they had the power to make the ban in the first place, and they hadn't done anything outside the limits of what they were allowed to do. Whether or not they agreed with the ban, or considered it to be excessive, would be irrelevant. The court simply does not have the legal authority to quash decisions of a public body simply because it disagrees with them or think they are unfair. (This part of the post was mainly in response to Uppercut's last one about precedent etc...)

 

[GIMH]

Which court would hear this case though? An English court would have no jurisdiction to quash a decision of an international organisation that has basically nil presence in the UK.

Edit: In any case, even if an English court was to hear it, they'd only be able to judicially review FIFA's decision, which means they'd only be able to consider whether or not they had the power to make the ban in the first place, and they hadn't done anything outside the limits of what they were allowed to do. Whether or not they agreed with the ban, or considered it to be excessive, would be irrelevant. The court simply does not have the legal authority to quash decisions of a public body simply because it disagrees with them or think they are unfair. (This part of the post was mainly in response to Uppercut's last one about precedent etc...)

Court of Arbitration for Sport

 

[sledger]

Doh. My bad.

 

[silentstriker]

Court of Arbitration for Sport

Why in the world would fifa submit itself to the jurisdiction of a court like that?

 

[GIMH]

I dunno if they do tbf. No claims to be an expert on this.

 

[flibbertyjibber]

4 month ban. Suck it Suarez.

If he'd sucked it he wouldn't be in this mess but he chose to bite instead.

 

[sledger]

I dunno if they do tbf. No claims to be an expert on this.

I think they do. I've just had a look at the FIFA statutes and they make it expressly clear that all members of FIFA are bound by the decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Whether FIFA itself is similarly bound is more ambiguous, but I would assume they probably are.

Edit: Actually, yeah, just read a bit further. They definitely are, but only for certain matters. Bans with durations of less than 3 months cannot be referred to the CAS according to the FIFA statutes, unless they're to do with doping. So it would appear that Liverpool/Uruguay would be able to go to them about Suarez.

 

[G.I.Joe]

 

[GIMH]

It makes you think it's not an instinctive red flash but something between them.

which probably makes it worse. I think?

 

[Magrat Garlick]

I think they do. I've just had a look at the FIFA statutes and they make it expressly clear that all members of FIFA are bound by the decisions of the Court of Arbitration for Sport. Whether FIFA itself is similarly bound is more ambiguous, but I would assume they probably are.

Edit: Actually, yeah, just read a bit further. They definitely are, but only for certain matters. Bans with durations of less than 3 months cannot be referred to the CAS according to the FIFA statutes, unless they're to do with doping. So it would appear that Liverpool/Uruguay would be able to go to them about Suarez.

They'd be kicked out of IOC if they weren't bound to CAS, which may not seem to matter too much but may influence the canapé-eaters.

Would be interested to see this play out actually. Be nice to see how the FA and non-Liverpool clubs react. They would like to break with Fifa, but perhaps not over supporting a thug.

 

[BeeGee]

Has anyone explored the idea that he may be a vampire wearing really effective sunblock? Would be an interesting defense.

 

[Furball]

I think the ban's too lenient. I'd have banned him for the remainder of 2014.

 

[Furball]

I do actually think the ban is a bit OTT, in some ways. Not harsh on Suarez - he deserves it - but on Liverpool.

Nah get ****ed. Lie with dogs and you get fleas. **** Liverpool.

 

[Burgey]

Hope he goes to the CAS and gets six months tbh.

 

[Nate]

As long as Luis doesn't get paid while banned, I'll survive with the decision.

 

[G.I.Joe]

It makes you think it's not an instinctive red flash but something between them.

which probably makes it worse. I think?

I don't know whom to believe anymore.


The Uruguayans have just released a screengrab from the raw unedited footage that proves that the bitemarks were likely photoshopped to implicate Suarez:

 

[Ikki]

Reckon any desire Liverpool would have had of wanting to keep him will be gone if Real/Barca offer the right amount. For all his genius, he's a liability.

Some nice/intelligent discussion on this on RTE (surprisingly, Dunphy makes a few good points)

http://www.rte.ie/sport/soccer/worldcup/2014/0626/626802-analysis-suarez-a-proportional-response/

 

[social]

Reckon any desire Liverpool would have had of wanting to keep him will be gone if Real/Barca offer the right amount. For all his genius, he's a liability.

Some nice/intelligent discussion on this on RTE (surprisingly, Dunphy makes a few good points)

RTÉ Sport - FIFA World Cup 2014 Analysis: Suarez - A proportional response?

Yep

It's financial Russian roulette if they keep him as he is still worth plenty atm but worthless if he loses the plot again due to the suspension that will come his way

Cash in and invest wisely IMO