no jujstice

agreed

Africans are just too much emotional...
it shows today..

CONGRAT TO CALM DOWN URUGUAY!

Terrible handball incident. Very bad for the game, but Ghana should have made that penalty count...

disagree totally. Suarez excellent selflessness!

WELL ..rules are rules....

Agree.
Shows the stupidity of the guys who run football. Penalty goal, no question ! Makes a farce of the game !

Was never a free kick & Uruguay should have had a pen earlier anyhow. Only downside was that I'm on Suarez top goalscorer as well as Uruguay outright [;)]

best match of tourney,in all truth any bloke on the line would probably do the same.

Ghana played the most entertaining football in the tournament.
I feel for the players who gave their all and entertained every time !

of course as the rules stand  nothing could be done but surely a rule change would be a good idea.

Don't mind that. Professional foul.

Why didnt he just head it out though?

lets hope uragauy outplay holland and get all sorts of dodgy decisions   preferably poor penalty decisions against them.

sickoflayinwinners did you not see the penalty incident NOT GIVEN to Uruguay? Is it better that he lashed out a leg, intentionally, to stop the guy, whereas the other guy stuck out his hand intentionally. They GOT their penalty chance and missed

any player would have done the same in that situation. It's a reflex action as much as anything. Should not be labelled a cheat. If it was a boxing match Uruguay won easily on pts. For me, it was justice Uruguay went through - it was never a free kick for one thing, and time was already up for another.
Hope Suarez has chance to play in final. He has been one of the stand out players of this tourno.

FIFA could ban him for 2 games

Uruguay have a reputation as cheats, and as for suarez, once a cheat always a cheat.

How can it be fair play when a trip six inches inside the far corner of a penalty area is punished in exactly the same way as a deliberate hand ball on the line to prevent a certain goal?  Madness.  Ref should be allowed to play 'advantage' and award a goal.

I backed Uruguay but that incident was a disgrace.

Don't be silly. Uruguay had a stonewall pen not given during match. Equally unjust.

To be equally unjust it would need to have been a certain goal had the 'offence' (in your view) not happened.  So who's being silly?

The penalty laws as they stand would be the equivalent in horse-racing of a horse getting bumped in the last furlong and being awarded the race automatically whether it ended up beaten 20 lengths or a nose.

It was equally unjust because it wasn't given. Uruguay should have been given a penalty but weren't, Ghana should of had a goal but got a penalty (Because the rules won't allow, agree should be looked at). In fact the Uruguay injustice was greater, as a penalty should be scored 80% of the time.

Ghana should HAVE had a goal not "should of".

If every unjust incident in a game was analysed it would take forever to sort out. And every incident (no matter how trivial) affects the result of every game.

Ghana's case is still nothing on that of England - we scored a crucial goal and they still didn't get it given!

If he did not handball it, it would have hit his face. How is that a goal?

Or everytime someone handballs the ball in the penalty box, it should be a penalty goal?

for me suarez is the hero of the match.rules are in this situation that there will be a penalty.so it was his only option to give his team another minimum chance to stay alive...what do u expect him to to??watch the ball going in??

@helissio it would have certainly gone in..watch it another time carefully..it was too far aside his head..

i think the thing thats being missed here is, when a player  is  fouled in  the box a penalty is a just decision as its before he has a shot on goal and therefore conceding a pen is punishment enuff, even when  a guy is caught from behind  when 1 on 1 with goalie the penalty is recreating a similar scene.nowadays with keepers allowed to move obviously mamy more pens are missed.the uraguay pen decision is totaly different, the ref didnt think it was a foul so he gave no penalty, this isnt a matter of whetherwots happened has been seen but a debateon what is a fairer punishment.

What Suarez did was for his team and his country and he can stand proud with his head held high.

If he could have headed it he would have, but at the end of the day you defend your goal with whatever it takes.

I think the guy will be treated like a hero in Uruguay and so he should be, he gave up the right to play in the semi finals to give his team a chance of getting through.

doubt they,ll get past holland but who knows?

Will be a disgrace if FIFA extend the ban, as they are hinting they might, simply to pander to African sensibilities and in a rather belated attempt to be seen to be upholding fair play, ridiculous as that concept is in football where all players do whatever they can in the interests of the their own team-time wasting, diving, appealing for throw ins/corners they know aren't theirs etc, etc.

The point is being missed.  It isn't a tackle nobody saw, or a ball that went over the line but wasn't counted as a goal, its worse than that.  The ref hasn't failed to spot something and award the wrong decision.  He has spotted what happened correctly and appliced the law correctly and it still benefits the cheating team.

When the law itself, proply administered, gives cheating team an advantage, the game has a problem which has to be addressed.

@sibaroni

what benefits the cheating team?getting a penalty against them??come on ....

ghana got the penalty, and missed the opurtunety to knock uruguay out...simply..

its ghanas fault...get the penalty in and your done.

@shrewdbury
Are you joking, England had a goal not given in a game they lost 4-1 in the second round of the world cup.
Ghana had a goal not given(becuase someone cheated) that would have won them the quater-final making them the most successful African team of all time. But cheating wins again.

A Penalty is for any foul in the box whether the player is likely to score or not. THere has to be a harsher punishment when a team is stopped from scoring a 100% certain goal by cheating. As dramatic as it sounds, that Uruguayan player should be banned from international football indefinitely, if the game is to have any spirit.

The likes of Henry or maradonna, still had to actually score their goal and it was partly due to terrible defending but there is no way to take account for last-man-back goalkeeping in an international football match in the world cup!

@vicsvictory
"what benefits the cheating team?getting a penalty against them??come on ....
"

Better a penalty than a goal, clearly.
So it's advantage to the cheater, the one who has cheat.
How did you come up with that argument????.....eh....come on....

this is one of the problem with the red card offences, they are disproportionate punishments when you consider the effect on the game.  a professional foul after 5 mins gets 85 minutes of ten men when a 1-0 deficit over 85 minutes is easy to overcome.  a red for stopping a certain goal in the 120th minute is no deterrent at all, as evidenced by the fact that both players on the line tried to punch it, when a goal at that stage would be fatal

@sibaroni

what benefits the cheating team?getting a penalty against them??come on ....

ghana got the penalty, and missed the opurtunety to knock uruguay out...simply..

its ghanas fault...get the penalty in and your done.
-------------------
the cheaters were replacing a 100% chance of goal with a 75% chance of a goal; do you really think that is a punishment?

limited ability....Thinkabout it. You consider it an heroic thing to do. What was so heroic? He was gonna miss the semifinal anyway if he had let it in. It was a no-brainer. Not deserving of national hero status in any shape or form. It kept his team AND HIM in the World Cup.

And there's no debate needed here. Penalty goal a la penalty try in rugby is the obvious rule needed here.

Penalty goal. Yellow card. No ridiculous bans. End of.

I totally disagree with the thread title and everybody that cries 'cheat' re the handball. For all these people, i would reccomend looking once again at the situation where the free kick that led to the penalty - IT WAS A BLATANT DIVE form the ghanaian player, he managed to fool the linesman and the ref, THIS IS WHAT I CALL A CHEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEEAT!!!! Whatever happened later is irrelevant - if there was no cheating, there would have not been the handball, penalty etc.
So, there was justice. He missed that penalty, went into shoot out, the better team wan.
Justice prevailed.

just about every football fan would want the same, penalty goal. No red card because so often a game dies after a red card.

To my mind that one thing made Suarez man of the match, cos that one thing almost certainly saved Uruguay from defeat.

Gamesmanship is an all important part football which you will never be able to eradicate

limited ...not to labour the point but you said "he gave up the right to be in the semi"

No he did not.

Stop making him a martyr. He's nothin of the sort.

Imagine the match was played within a week of football being invented and the rules were being adjusted after each game in order to decide what the final set of rules would be.

Does anyone believe that the punishment decided for that denial of a certain goal would be the same as the punishment for someone fouled just inside the far corner of the box?

The rules need changed.

Ageed steeplechasing. Just seen this thread - was out last night - and have started a similar one on footy forum this evening.

The penalty for unlawfully stopping a 100% chance of a goal (and in last night's game a win) cannot be a 70-80%chance of a goal (which is the chance of scoring froma penalty).

As the rules stand, players make a net gain from committing offenses in that situation. So it is unurprising that such events occur.

Why did Suarez handle it? Because a penalty is better than a goal and a lost match. Would he have handled it if he knew a penalty goal would be awarded were he to do so? Probably not. Why should he? There's nothing to gain (and if he could still be carded, which I would suggest, something to lose).

Rules that benefit offending are incorrect and should be changed.

The problem would be if, say, a goal bound shot was stopped by a player around the penalty spot, but there is a good chance the keeper would have* stopped it. Tough to decide where to draw the line there, but it's good to have the debate.

*btw Bix can I just point out what a cucking funt you are. Not only because had I just used the classically correct version, 'should of' being often used nowadays possibly because of the similarity to should've, but you actually had nothing to say on the subject matter. Do you trawl the forums looking for grammatical mistakes, because if so I imagine you have your work cut out. FYI I have a PhD requiring a rather large and precisely worded thesis and if I could be bothered I might spend my time highlighting typos in virtually every post. However given the light-hearted back an forth banter that would be pointless, rather like your contribution.

as for a previous poster say" he sacrificed his chance of playing in the semi final for his team 2 this is clearly the stupidest comment on the thread, wot he did do was in fact give himself a chance of playing in a world cup final  as if he didnt  handle the ball the was  not gonna a be a semi final with his team in it.he did in fact sacrifice absolutely nothing.he cheated because hes a cheat an not for some honourable sacrificial reason.

personally i hope his side dont make the final and id be quite happy to se him break his leg n the semi and never be able to play again.

sickoflayinwinners 04 Jul 10 19:50 
as for a previous poster say" he sacrificed his chance of playing in the semi final for his team 2 this is clearly the stupidest comment on the thread, wot he did do was in fact give himself a chance of playing in a world cup final  as if he didnt  handle the ball the was  not gonna a be a semi final with his team in it.he did in fact sacrifice absolutely nothing.he cheated because hes a cheat an not for some honourable sacrificial reason.

Spot on (though your next post is totally OTT).

its basically what henry did at the opposite end, i think you do it and then see what happens, not sure you can help once you are either out of control of the ball or acting on instincts
happens all over the pitch

for sure his mates would have said after the match

"why didnt you handle it" if he hadnt
if you see what i mean

rule change or

dont miss from 12 yards