FA: Suarez didn’t grasp severity of situation

Luis Suarez did not appreciate “the seriousness” of biting Branislav Ivanovic when he argued against a long ban, says a Football Association panel.

The Liverpool striker accepted a three-game violent conduct ban, but claimed the incident did not deserve more.

However when he was banned for 10 games he decided not to appeal. 

The FA's written reasons for the ban stated it should send out a "strong message that such deplorable behaviours do not have a place in football".

When it was first announced that Suarez had received a 10 game ban, I thought it was harsh and was confused how he got 10 games for biting and only eight games for racially abusing Patrice Evra.

But reading the rationale behind the decision and taking into account that he got a seven game ban for biting someone in an Eredivisie game, you’d have expected him to receive at least seven games so when you think about it 10 isn’t actually that harsh or that much of a surprise.

What it does mean, however, is that the FA clearly got it wrong by not punishing Suarez, and John Terry for that matter, enough for racially abusing opponents.

There have been some reports that Suarez might try to leave Liverpool in the summer as his ban means he won’t be able to play again until October, but if he does decide to leave I hope the FA did what they did with Joey Barton and reached an agreement with the French FA to ensure his 12 game ban carried over.

But if those rumours of Suarez leaving are false and he does stay at Anfield, he will be walking on incredibly thin ice because he’s shown on numerous occasions that he has a serious anger problem when he’s playing, and if he loses it again and does something of a similar vein to some of his other past discretions, he could face missing half a season.