I just can't see how Suarez's actions were trivial as some suggest. In most other occupations he would have been dismissed for gross misconduct for one bite, never mind 3. He has previously been found guilty of racist conduct, something else most other people would be dismissed for, and despite significant disciplinary sanctions on each occasion he continues with similar conduct.
Comparisons with the behaviour and punishments of other players are reasonable, but 2 wrongs don't make a right, and aren't always straightforward; someone has pointed out the difficulty in telling a mistimed tackle from a malicious one, and with biting there is the increased danger of infection that could be just as damaging to health as a broken bone, human bites have been said to be potentially more dangerous than animal bites. Football generally needs to get its act together. If players are seen stamping on others' heads or meting out kidney punches, why don't they end up in court, most mere mortal Joe Publics would?
If I was in work and a competitor from a rival firm bit me as I went about my job, I would want a bit more than a 4 month suspension on full pay (with a relatively minor fine) as a punishment, especially if I discovered it was the third time he/she had done such a thing, and if one of my children was bitten on the sporting field and people described it as a 'girlie' incident I would be livid. Should I then encourage my child to see such behaviour as acceptable? I find it very worrying that people see this as trivial.
