Thread: Is it fair?

yeah but the thing is beats if you think that bringing someone down on purpose from behind is cheating then bascially every premier league footballer is a cheat. Players such as wilson Palacios are actually paid to do things like this. If you deliberately elbow someone you are definitely dirty but whether you're cheating or not is another matter. Bringing someone down from behind is not cheating its just part of the game and if you dont like seeing it then this probably isnt the sport for u.

Also i dont think you can take literal dictionary descriptions and then just apply them to football. It doesnt work very well tbh as these definitions are much more general whereas the rules of football are quite specific.

05grottim is on the same page as me and you're on another one I guess. Breaking rules in cards, as in the example, is obviously different than breaking rules in football. Card games are infinitely simpler than field sports. Cheating at cards always involves deception on the level of bribing a referee such as tampering with the deck or hiding cards up the sleeve, etc. If you cheat at cards you really aren't even playing the game - the whole thing is a wash. Elbowing someone or bringing them down from behind or, yes, even handling the ball does not mean the player is no longer playing football, he has simply made an illegal move within the game. It's the same as breaking a law, but you wouldn't call someone who commits assault or arson or even murder a "cheat" because that doesn't fit the definition of cheating.

There are different kinds of rulebreaking in field sports as we have already pointed out, and "cheating" is the wrong word to describe something like a foul or infraction because such things are defined in the laws of the game and consequences are mapped out for them. There is nothing "unfair" about Suarez handling the ball on the line because everybody involved in the game knows the rules of football and should know that such a move can potentially take place and what the consequences of such an action are. Any player on any team can choose to make such a move and the result is (as long as the referee catches it, which he did) a red card and a penalty kick. If you think that is "unfair" then you must argue to change the rules that govern the game. Suarez is deservedly a national hero for what he did, and any footballer with a brain knows he would have done the same to save his team's skin. If you say "no I wouldn't because that ruins the integrity of the game" then you have either never played sports at a competitive level or are a coward.

I see that you've posted your definition from dictionary.com and I'm sure you'll cling to that so I don't think I'll be convincing you of anything here. As 05grottim pointed out those are all very general definitions of the word because it can be applied in a great many settings. I don't think it's a coincidence that fraudulence, dishonesty, and trickery are mentioned in basically all of the other definitions listed there - it's quite obvious that is the main implication of the word. Perhaps it is more of a British usage to call someone a "cheater" for causing a foul or infraction within a sport, because I'm American and have never heard the word used in that context (again, only in the context of gaining an unfair advantage by way of illegal drugs or matchfixing) and have been watching and playing sports for my entire life. I have also yet to hear an American label Suarez as a cheater, so perhaps there is something to that possibility.

I didn't mean to imply that I was correct just because someone agreed with me, I just meant to say that we both seem to have the one way of thinking about it and you (and others) have another. What I meant by "different types of rule breaking" was the difference between breaking the rules of play on the field and breaking rules such as drug bans and matchfixing, etc. Card games do not really have those different levels. There is no written rule in poker for example that if you are caught stealing chips from the pot then you must dole them out equally amongst the other players and then serve a one game ban or if you are caught with a card up your sleeve or in your lap that you must sit out the next 5 hands. If you do any of those things you are a cheat because you are tampering with the legitimacy of the game.

I honestly don't think I would have punched Suarez in the face because I have seen a very similar play happen in a game I was involved in. A defender on the opposing side was running back towards his goal line chasing a ball that had beaten his out-of-position keeper. It took a bad hop and came up too high for him to thigh it over the bar as he intended, so he simulated the thigh movement but used his hand to knock it over the bar. The referee was behind him and did not see it because he saw the thigh come up and the hand movement was very subtle. The linesman should have had a clear view from the sideline but she was a girl of about 18 and too timid to make the call so she let it stand. I saw what had happened but I was not angry at the player but rather the linesman for being too afraid to make the correct call. The opposing team was already down by a goal so this was clearly a big decision for them. We went on to knock in another goal or two but I don't remember ever being angry at the player, but being aggravated with the linesman because it was clear she had seen it and was too nervous to make such a decision when the referee appealed to her.

I understand you are limiting this to deliberate actions but it just doesn't make sense to me to use the word "cheat" in that instance. I won't pursue the argument further because, as you said, I think we'll have to agree to disagree. To answer your side-note question, I don't think Suarez would have owned up to it in the course of the game if the ref hadn't seen it. It was funny to see him act surprised when the ref issued the card after he had coolly walked away from the play as if nothing had happened.

Like the player from my earlier example, I think when you make a play like that your instinct is to get away with as much as you can. You've already saved the goal, if you avoid ejection then you've really gotten away with murder. I think he would have definitely owned up to it after the game. He knows any replay would show what he did and he's even bragged a bit in the press about making the "save of the tournament." In my eyes I still wouldn't view him as a cheat because I think it is the instincts of the seasoned player that leads to him punching that ball away and it is the instinct of self-preservation that causes him to walk away as if nothing had happened. Again, you could argue that any player in his position would have done the same. If you are offered the choice of winning a World Cup game for your country in that manner and living in a bit of infamy or losing but not having to make the handball as the ball whizzes past you, you have to go with the former option. If not then I don't know what's wrong with you but I'd never want you as a teammate or a player on my team. If I remember correctly, he didn't argue for long when he was booked, he gave his act of surprise and then complied immediately. I'm sure he was expecting it.