Football Conspiracy of the week (1)

Hmmm..

I read the comments made recently by Luis Suarez's legal representative Alejandro Balbi, in which he spoke of a conspiracy by Italy and England to get Suarez banned. (1) He said;

"We don't have any doubts that this has happened because it's Suarez and secondly because Italy was eliminated."

This got me thinking. Football can be a murky sport at times, and there are lots of issues that could do with a little discussion. Is Suarez really as guilty as he's made out to be? Sure, the video evidence seems to suggest so, but nevertheless, let's kick off the:

Football Conspiracy Of the Week 1.

Q. Do the English media have it in for Luis Suarez?

Firstly, there's no doubting the cynical nature of the English press. Often, celebrities are idolised, before being tossed to the hounds at the first possible sight of trouble. In fact, The Independent recently reported that Suarez's grandmother said that he has been treated "like a dog". (2)

Let's be fair. Dogs usually get incinerated for biting someone.

Obviously Suarez is a human being, with feelings and emotions - and it's evident that he struggles to control them at times. Also, it was hardly a nibble. If you hadn't seen it and you were relying on reports alone, you could be forgiven for expecting a scene from the Walking Dead. Alas, he didn't even draw blood.

Surely Alex Song's WWE-style elbow drop during the Cameroon Croatia game was just as violent? (3) Why was he only given a three-match ban? Would Suarez really be given the same treatment in that situation? Maybe there could actually be a conspiracy.

The referee was aware of the incident at the time, but allowed Suarez to stay on the field, despite seeing the marks according to Giorgio Chiellini himself. Nonetheless, FIFA were well within their rights to pursue Suarez, as biting is violent conduct. The funny thing is, even Chiellini himself has had enough, calling on people to "give him (Suarez) a break". (4)

The issue is that Suarez has done it before, with his bite on Chelsea's Branislav Ivanovic coming only last year. He earned a ten-match ban for his troubles, but Ivanovic did forgive him, and he accepted his apology. (5)

People tend to forget that biting another player is the last thing that he would have ever wanted to do. He let down his country - and now that they've crashed out of the World Cup, it all means nothing.

He made a mistake. People keep saying that they "wouldn't bite somebody at work", but you can't compare filing in an office to balancing the sporting dreams of a nation whilst the world watches on. It's starting to sound like I have some sympathy for him, but only because I understand that he must feel terrible about the situation.

The English media have revelled in their opportunity to stick the knife in, both now and in the past. Here are a few headlines from a range of publications.

Telegraph:

Luis Suarez bites Giorgio Chiellini - plus other sportsmen

Luis Suarez needs therapy to overcome urge to bite

Mirror:

Luis Suarez bite: How long should the Uruguay striker be banned for? -

And should Liverpool sell him?

Independent:

You're more likely to be bitten by Uruguay striker than by a shark

Of course, they couldn't write these sorts of headlines if Suarez didn't give them the opportunity to, but can he really blame them for the length of his ban? If FIFA had decided to be lenient with him, the papers would have had a field day - so maybe it could be argued that they had an indirect effect on the outcome of Suarez's ban.

However, Suarez was the one who had the direct effect, through a series of bad decisions over the past couple of seasons and FIFA did what they had to do.

Verdict: No conspiracy.

Luis Suarez: FIFA's Fall Guy?

First off, I should probably set a few things straight. Luis Suarez is definitely guilty of biting Giorgio Chiellini, with the evidence insurmountable. 

Suarez denied biting his opponent, inviting derision when he explained;

"After the impact … I lost my balance, making my body unstable and falling on top of my opponent”.

Yeah, okay then Luis. If you say so.

However, the incident also landed FIFA in an uncomfortable position. The problem is, Suarez has previous for biting, leaving footballs governing body with no choice but to throw the book at him - so they did the right thing and banned him for four months.

The thing is, FIFA aren't exactly a squeaky clean organisation themselves, with allegations of corruption and bribery never too far away from its halls. Of course Suarez is guilty,but is FIFA truly fit to be his judge?

Uruguay manager Oscar Tabarez criticised the ban, calling the 9-match suspension "excessive", while some of Suarez's team-mates questioned the English media's role in the coverage as well as the aftermath.

There's no doubting that the English media latched onto the story, as it lessened the blow of the national team going out earlier in the day, but nobody forced Suarez to bare his teeth during an important World Cup match.

FIFA had to make the call with Suarez, but that doesn't mean that they were fit to do so. Their morals and ethics have been questioned a lot by the media recently, with the 2022 Qatar World Cup drawing even the sponsors to question their decision making abilities, (1) so maybe they thought giving Suarez an "excessive" punishment would show that they don't let rule-breaking slide.

The timing of the bite was also helpful for FIFA, as sports websites and pages around the world focused on Suarez's moment of madness. 

After the dust dies down, a few things will be certain. Suarez will be banned, and sure, England are out, but there will still be something fishy going on with FIFA. The 2014 World Cup will be remembered for Suarez, but FIFA should be more worried about 2022.

Borderlands 2: PS Vita Frame-Rate

For me, Borderlands 2 was one of the best games of 2012 and I spent countless hours loot-hunting with my friends, so when I heard that the Vita was getting a release I was instantly sold.

I bought the game at full price, (as the DLC is only available through a download code included with the game) and was immediately disappointed. 

Sure, I wasn't expecting parity with my shiny PS3 version, but I didn't expect the game to run in slow-motion. I don't care if enemies disappear when they die, or about the dismal controls, or even about the excessively long load-times. (To the point where I would start playing with my phone every time I transitioned into a new area.)

 None of the downgrades compare to the shocking frame-rate issues, which pretty much ruin the whole experience. In some areas, it literally runs in show motion, leaving the player feeling disconnected.

In one of the early missions in the vanilla game, you're tasked with shooting projectiles out of the air that are flung towards you, but the engine runs so badly it's near-impossible until you learn to compensate for the lack of responsiveness. (I ended up using a shotgun with a wide spread.)

I'm no graphics elitist, (I'll happily play at 30 FPS) but in certain areas this game is damn near unplayable, which is a shame considering its PC and console pedigree. It slowed down to 20 FPS on the PS3 version that I enjoyed over two years ago, (1) but this is far worse. It's understandable that it pushed the capabilities of the Vita, but it feels like you're running through butter for the most part.

If you can handle the slow-mo, then it's worth a purchase - and when it does run normally it's great fun. It's just that for the most part, it doesn't. 

Woy's World Cup revolution ends in winless whimper

When the groups for the 2014 World Cup were announced, it was obvious that England were in a sticky predicament.

Group D consisted of Italy, Uruguay and Costa Rica, the only group in the Cup that contained three previous winners of the coveted trophy.

Back at home, the press downplayed England's chances of success, but deep down, nearly every fan I spoke to thought England had a chance. Maybe even a good chance. 

Of course, it wasn't meant to be - with England ending the tournament bottom of the group, with no wins and just a solitary point to their name. It was billed as the 'group of death', but for the English, it seemed like a group of disappointment.

Is this really the future of international football for England? With the dismantling of the so-called golden generation, the next batch of young lions had a great chance to break free of the shackles of the past - but failed at the first hurdle with no wins at the World Cup for the first time since 1958. (1)

As England's solitary World Cup win will be 50 years old by the time Euro 2016 comes around, the idea of silverware seems even more unlikely. At least the team will have time to mature over the next two years - but next time, let's not get our hopes up too much.

It'll probably just lead to more disappointment.

 

Steven Gerrard close to quitting for England?

It'll be a sad day for England if skipper Steven Gerrard decides to retire, but after a dismal showing at the 2014 World Cup, rumours abound that he may be close to ending his 14-year association with the club.

Gerrard has long been a vital part of the team, with his vision and leadership proving to be a huge asset for the squad, yet the team has consistently failed to deliver on the world stage - despite the high-profile stars and their equally high-profile wages.

England turned up at the World Cup with many in the media writing off their chances before a ball was kicked. In many ways, the losses they suffered were to be expected - and came against top quality opposition in Italy and Uruguay. 

Why should Gerrard have to fall on his sword because the team didn't win? When discussing the performance against Italy, former player Gary Neville said;

'The football we played in that game was some of the best I’ve seen in 10 or 15 years in a competitive World Cup match or European Championship match".

Gerrard happened to play the full 90 minutes.

Of course, he'll be 36 when the Euro's come around in 2016, but he could still help England on the rocky road to qualification. For whatever reason, it just didn't seem to happen for Gerrard at the World Cup.

Scoring the opener against the US in 2010 must be a personal highlight, yet Robert Green's mishandling of Clint Dempsey's speculative effort in the 40th minute seems to be the 'highlight' that every England fan remembers.  

Whatever the case, Wayne Rooney is currently being touted as the ideal replacement in the role, but it's doubtful that anyone in the current England set-up, (Rooney included) have what it takes to replace the Liverpool skipper's drive for the team. 

Despite the lack of silverware, Gerrard has always given his all for the national team. Perhaps he will continue to do so.

Video Games: the Modern A-Z

Video Games: the Modern A-Z

Some important news, (for me at the very least).

I finally got around to releasing the book I've been working on for quite a while now. I spend a decent amount of time talking about some of the issues in modern gaming - so if you're at all interested, why not give it a try?

The direct Amazon link is available here.

Thanks for reading, of course any feedback would be welcome.

James