This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.
You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.theguardian.com/football/2014/jun/25/luis-suarez-bite-uruguayan-english-press-agenda
The article has changed 4 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.
| Version 0 | Version 1 |
|---|---|
| Luis Suárez ‘bite’: Uruguayan TV station attacks English press agenda | Luis Suárez ‘bite’: Uruguayan TV station attacks English press agenda |
| (35 minutes later) | |
| The Luis Suárez “biting” incident has been explained away by a Uruguayan TV station as a conspiracy by the English – just like the 1966 World Cup final. | |
| A report on the Tenfield station’s website says Suárez’s face made contact with Giorgio Chiellini’s shoulder but only became an issue about biting when British reporters repeatedly asked questions in the post-match press conference, forcing Fifa to look into the matter. The report adds that Geoff Hurst’s second goal in the 1966 final did not cross the line. | A report on the Tenfield station’s website says Suárez’s face made contact with Giorgio Chiellini’s shoulder but only became an issue about biting when British reporters repeatedly asked questions in the post-match press conference, forcing Fifa to look into the matter. The report adds that Geoff Hurst’s second goal in the 1966 final did not cross the line. |
| It says: “In the TV replay, as viewed in the press area, it appears that Luisito’s face comes in contact with Chiellini without it being clear whether he bites him as was claimed by those – especially the English – who were keen to play down Uruguay’s victory. | It says: “In the TV replay, as viewed in the press area, it appears that Luisito’s face comes in contact with Chiellini without it being clear whether he bites him as was claimed by those – especially the English – who were keen to play down Uruguay’s victory. |
| “In our view the TV picture is not clear as to whether or not Suárez bites the shoulder of the Italian defender. Note how Suárez stumbles after jumping for the ball and how his face hits the shoulder of the Italian player. | “In our view the TV picture is not clear as to whether or not Suárez bites the shoulder of the Italian defender. Note how Suárez stumbles after jumping for the ball and how his face hits the shoulder of the Italian player. |
| “British reporters, in the press conference, asked Óscar Tabárez three times about the incident, saying that: ‘Suárez bit Chiellini.’ Their intention was Fifa should intervene and expel Luisito from the World Cup. | |
| “It would be good if these Englishmen, who are concerned to have Suárez suspended, remember how they won the World Cup in 1966 with a ball which was not a goal.” | “It would be good if these Englishmen, who are concerned to have Suárez suspended, remember how they won the World Cup in 1966 with a ball which was not a goal.” |
| Other press reaction in Uruguay included coverage of the response on social media and overseas, and the sense that all may not have been as it seemed – El Observador pointing to a lack of definitive photo evidence. | Other press reaction in Uruguay included coverage of the response on social media and overseas, and the sense that all may not have been as it seemed – El Observador pointing to a lack of definitive photo evidence. |
| “There was no single picture to prove there was a bite. Two images were circulating: one, of Chiellini with his shirt up for the referee, appeared to show he had been visited by a vampire. In the other there was nothing. Was it Photoshop? | “There was no single picture to prove there was a bite. Two images were circulating: one, of Chiellini with his shirt up for the referee, appeared to show he had been visited by a vampire. In the other there was nothing. Was it Photoshop? |
| “But the episode was enough for Luisito to again be the talk of the British media, and relegated the result between Uruguay and Italy to second place. All British media detailed it on their websites in great detail.” | “But the episode was enough for Luisito to again be the talk of the British media, and relegated the result between Uruguay and Italy to second place. All British media detailed it on their websites in great detail.” |
| Últimas Noticias saw both sides, reporting: “The photos spread over social networks. But nobody talks about how Suárez was injured in the jaw and the eye. Suárez said ‘these things happen on the pitch’ and played down his swollen face.” | |
| El País also covered the UK reaction: “The assumption that Suárez bit [Chellini] flew around the world as soon as the incident happened, even before the game ended. The main English newspapers were tough with the Liverpool player. It is worth remembering that most of the English press harassed the Uruguayan after the bite that he gave Branislav Ivanovic.” | |
| Public opinion in Uruguay, meanwhile, was divided. “We needed to win, so if you have to hit you hit, if you have to bite you bite,” said Barbara Giordano, a 26-year-old law student in Montevideo. | Public opinion in Uruguay, meanwhile, was divided. “We needed to win, so if you have to hit you hit, if you have to bite you bite,” said Barbara Giordano, a 26-year-old law student in Montevideo. |
| Some, though, were furious. “This kid can’t control his biting and attacking issues,” said Luis Lara, a 52-year-old shopkeeper. “That makes all of us Uruguayans look bad.” | Some, though, were furious. “This kid can’t control his biting and attacking issues,” said Luis Lara, a 52-year-old shopkeeper. “That makes all of us Uruguayans look bad.” |