Liam Brady exonerates Uruguayan cheat

I'm puzzled as to why Liam Brady (whom I'm led to believe heads up Arsenal's Youth Academy) omitted to include the word "cheating" in this interview ........
[How much emphasis is placed on guiding a young player on how to live their lives properly?
We do our utmost to give them guidance and advice on all manner of things, like warning them of what to steer clear of. We advise on all things from key areas like diet to teaching them to be punctual. I am always telling the kids it’s better to be half an hour early than one minute late. This is all done in order to help them advance their careers.]
Read more: http://soccerlens.com/interview-with-liam-brady/6307/#ixzz0sbj4gxIh
By stopping the ball with his hand from crossing the line, the Uruguay player stopped Ghana from going through to the semis. Giving a penalty (where failing to score is about 12%) was not good enough. And the platitudes of their coach Tabarez saying that Suarez did not cheat but did something "instinctive" is defending the indefensible. Surely a crooks charter. Get rid of Sep Blatter and bring on camera technology. To say I'm sick as a parrot is an understatement.

He did what he had to do and suffered the consequences. He got red carded and will miss the semi-finals of the world cup. Offer any team the chance to take one penalty kick to win in the world cup 1/4 final (and even if you miss your still not out) and they will all snap your hand off.
The Ghanian missed and he had his chance as is clearly stated in the rules. What would camera technology have changed in this instance? The ref got it right. Ghana got their reward and Ururguay got their punishment.
He actions spared his team but the team still had to go on and win and ghana again got their chance and again they didn't take it.

It was basically a professional foul. It wasn`t done to deceive the referree. It was a last ditch attempt to stop the ball crossing the line and I am sure all Uruguay would approve that action. If it occurred in the middle of the first half the player might have left the ball enter the net.
I am very disappointed for GHana ,but I would have done the exact same thing if i was in Suarez position. He basically gave Uruguay from no chance to a very slim chance of progressing. The fact that Uruguay survived the penalty and triumphed in the penalty shoot out made rivetting viewing. We have often seen this in GAA mathes where one team looks to have it won with time almost up and the other team manages to equalise and then win. A certain match between dubiln and meath in the 90s comes to mind.The emotional rollercoaster of the fans leaves the losing supporters gutted.

Yeah, it's basically a professional foul and is no different from any foul really in that you can choose to foul and take the consequences.

It's obviously quite similiar to say an illegal tackle by the last man back on a striker through on goal.

All these cheating allegations have got out of hand (if you'll pardon the pun!).

It's harder to take if the ref doesn't spot it.

In general the punishment is appropriate, red card plus penalty, but in this situation, where there was only a few seconds left on the clock, it's clear that the red card would make no difference to the outcome so conceding a penalty was infintely better than conceding a goal for Uruguay.

Defenders on the line have always done this at all levels of the game. It might not always result in a fair outcome but that's life.

But what do ye think of Brady ............ as a man who encourages that sort of thing ......... and coaches kids to be sportsmanlike? In the chat afterwards he said something like .......... Suarez did what he had to do ie. stop the certain goal with his hand ........ and got his team to the next round. That's what it's all about. This dichotomy should be explained. He (Suarez) and by complicity the whole team cheated another team out of it's rightful place in the next round. Surely it teaches those kids to be hypocritical in their ways.

Chocks away said:

But what do ye think of Brady ............ as a man who encourages that sort of thing ......... and coaches kids to be sportsmanlike? In the chat afterwards he said something like .......... Suarez did what he had to do ie. stop the certain goal with his hand ........ and got his team to the next round. That's what it's all about. This dichotomy should be explained. He (Suarez) and by complicity the whole team cheated another team out of it's rightful place in the next round. Surely it teaches those kids to be hypocritical in their ways.

Click to expand...

No.1 he was being employed as a pundit to give his honest opinion on the match, Suarez did what anyone would have done, to start preaching about sportsmanship and what kids think would have been galling.
No.2 Ghana did not have a rightful place in the next round, they had their chance and blew it.

Uruguay didnt cheat anybody, Suarez didnt cheat anybody either. He handled the ball on the line, the referee saw it, he was sent off and a penalty was awarded to Ghana. Asamoah Gyan missed it. Simple.

Any player would have done it and would have risked a red card to give their team a chance. Suarez has been punished already and it looks like Fifa will punish him even more.

Its football for gods sake, not the United Nations Peace Keeping Sports Day Out for Children.

No cheating. End of.

I'm almost tempted to say that cheating pays .......... even if you're caught. So I guess all you guys were au fait with the peculiarities of Henri's hand ball? And all the people that called him a cheat were wrong?

The difference between the Henry situation and Suarez is simple. Henry handled the ball, the refereee missed it, France Scored. Therefore an injustice was done as Ireland lost out.

Suarez handled the ball, denying Ghana a clear goal, was spotted by the ref, sent off and therefore dealt with appropriately. The referee applied the correct rules. Decision was correct.

The fact that Ghana missed is just bad luck for them.


If my memory serves me correctly, Solsjkaer made a similar professional foul for United a few years ago when the keeper was beaten he tracked the opposing forward back and hacked him down. A profesional foul that he knew would result in red. A personal sacrifice for the good of the team.

Chocks away said:

I'm almost tempted to say that cheating pays .......... even if you're caught. So I guess all you guys were au fait with the peculiarities of Henri's hand ball? And all the people that called him a cheat were wrong?

Click to expand...

His surname is spelt 'Henry', not Henri. He cheated and got away with it and the Uruguyan was punished for his handball - that's the difference. You haven't really convinced posters of your argument.

rustbucket said:

If my memory serves me correctly, Solsjkaer made a similar professional foul for United a few years ago when the keeper was beaten he tracked the opposing forward back and hacked him down. A profesional foul that he knew would result in red. A personal sacrifice for the good of the team.

Click to expand...

Dead right.
Solsjkaer saved a certain goal from being scored and sacrificed himself for the team.
Suarez did the same and took the red card, suspension and the penalty.

You are the only mentioning cheating here OP. The ref applied the rules, what more do you want FIFA to do here? And how exactly would camera technology have changed this incident, the referee did their job and did it well

He didn't do anything that any other pro footballer would have done. Even the BBC, Lineker, Hansen etc all said the same today.

Its not like it was pre-planned. It was a sudden, spur of the moment reaction. It wasn't a decision even as far as I am concerned. Its not like Suarez thought "right there's the ball coming at me now, I think I might just handle it". It happens so quickly that its a gut reaction.

He was punished fully within the laws of the game as they stand, and for that reason I think he has suffered his punishment, as did his team. They had a man sent off, a last minute penalty awarded against them and in 95% of cases, that would have sent them home.

But the important thing is the laws of the game bit. Until the 'penalty goal' in brought in in soccer, this is the max punishment that a ref can give a player/team for this type of foul. So blame the rules of the game, not the player for making a reaction that is totally natural. Even if the penalty goal rule did exist, he would still have done what he done.

I'm not sure it was a deliberate attempt to cheat.

Looking at the replays it seems to me that he turns his face away from the ball as he raises his arms, so as per RMCF above it looked instinctive to me, a natural reaction to try and protect his face / head.

He broke the rules, hand to ball, last defender, denial of a goal-scoring opportunity, etc, he was sent off and the opposition had a penalty shot awarded, so the punishments fit the crime. The Ghanains failure to capitalise on the opportunity is a different issue.

Chocks away said:

I'm almost tempted to say that cheating pays .......... even if you're caught. So I guess all you guys were au fait with the peculiarities of Henri's hand ball? And all the people that called him a cheat were wrong?

Click to expand...

You've never played a game of football in your life have you?

I believe the BBC panel (Shearer) said during the Germany Argentina interval, that there wasn't a player out there who wouldn't have done the same.

I think this section from an article on Soccernet.com sums it all up well:

This was not Diego Maradona in 1986, Rivaldo in 2002 or Thierry Henry last year in Paris. Suarez cheated in the true sense of the word, but his transgression was punished immediately by a red card that will rule him out of the semi-final and a penalty that Asamoah Gyan should have scored to ensure Ghana would be the first African team to contest a World Cup semi-final.

That Gyan failed to do so was a heartbreaking moment for the player, Ghana, the continent of Africa and all those neutrals who had adopted the unfancied Black Stars as a second team. But that does not change the fact that Gyan failed to uphold his side of the bargain from 12 yards. In the end the punishment may not have fitted the crime, but justice, in the strictest sense, was done. Suarez should not be pilloried for that.
After all, in essence what distinguishes Suarez's intervention from a goalkeeper bringing down a striker, just as he is about to roll the ball into an empty net? Both deny a certain goal, but only one invites stern criticism and the sullying of a reputation.

This was not a deliberate attempt to con the referee by nefarious means. Maradona, Henry and Rivaldo all did precisely that, and criminally escaped censure. Suarez knew the implications of palming the ball away so blatantly. This was an act of desperation: with the World Cup slipping from Uruguay's grasp, it was a last throw of the dice and an act he performed on behalf of his team, sacrificing himself in the process. He knew the red card would follow.

Gustavo Poyet put it perfectly when he said Suarez was "taking one for the team". Knowing full well the consequences of his desperate actions, Suarez gave Uruguay a glimmer of hope of reaching their first World Cup semi-final for 40 years, but only that. It was a decision he had to take. He didn't have time to weigh up the morality of the act, ponder the impact he would have on a continent and how his actions would appear in the context of a wider debate about cheating in football. He had to fling up his arms to save his country, and that is what he did.

I think Suarez knew exactly what he was doing.The fact that it happened in a split second and was an instinctive reaction is fair enough but players make decisions in split seconds all the time and they know exactly what they are doing.Would he have blocked it with his hand if it was the first minute of the game. I don`t think so.
The fact is players have been through these scenarios in hundreds of matches and training sessions and also from witnessing matches and can size up the percentages instantly. Suarez calculation was pretty simple. Don`t handle the ball....Uruguay out.
Handle the ball....red card off the field for the remaining 10 seconds and miss the semi finals if Uruguay advance.More importantly Uruguay have a lifeline thru`a missed penalty and then suceeding in the penalty shoot out.
His foul was clearcut in front of the referree. If there is a deliberate attemt to deceive the referree like Maradona or Henry and is succeessful and is a matchchanger then that is harder to take.
In the first Cork kerry match ,with cork up a point with time almost up the gooch got possession. Being surrounded by 3 cork players he basically threw himself to the ground and the ref gave him a free. Gooch who is good at the percentages played on the fact that the ref likes to even things up.
No such ref assistance for cork when cadogan went to ground under much more pressure from the kerry backs as time was almost up in the replay and cork a point down.
We shouldn`t be so hard on the likes of Henri. The fact is players in every code will cheat or do anything to gain an advantage,legal or illegal. One good thing about Fifa, is that the referres are given strict guidelines about the punishments for various fouls, leaving less room for the referres discretion.

Are not most "fouls" cheating? hence the name. This foul was spotted and punished in accordance with the rules, end of.

sunrocks analysis is, to my mind, correct. But the punishment did not fit the crime. What about the advantage rule? Could the referee not use that? As he does if a player is fouled en route to goal and lets the play go on. The ball was stopped on the goal line ........ could the ref not use his noodle and ...... Jeez, I'm kinda sorry that I started this one. There seems to be no just outcome!

Chocks away said:

By stopping the ball with his hand from crossing the line, the Uruguay player stopped Ghana from going through to the semis. Giving a penalty (where failing to score is about 12%) was not good enough. And the platitudes of their coach Tabarez saying that Suarez did not cheat but did something "instinctive" is defending the indefensible. Surely a crooks charter. Get rid of Sep Blatter and bring on camera technology. To say I'm sick as a parrot is an understatement.

Click to expand...

while i agree with you, your last sentence really made me think. i've never owned a parrot and don't know how they look like when they are sick. do they vomit?