Is Liverpool’s Luis Suarez the Machiavellian Prince?
“Oh! what a tangled web we weave
When first we practice to deceive!”
Walter Scott, Scottish Novelist & Playwright
Deception is common place in football and no one should be in the least bit surprised when a player acts in a deceptive manner. Every time a match is played around the world deception is rife. Whether it be players, diving and feigning injury, managers, claiming players are unfit and then starting them moments later, and of course, owners, who promise the earth and deliver only dirt.
Where would the ‘beautiful game’ be without it? Answers on the back of a crisp £50 note!
To cheat and deceive a fellow player is common place and trying to get an opponent sent-off or trying to win a dodgy penalty is one, very unpleasant aspect, that haunts the planet’s number one sport. Any player doing so is immediately ridiculed and labelled as a cheat with a thousand and one images and slow-motion replays to prove so.
Of course, in the vast majority of cases, such un-sportsmanlike behaviour is quickly forgotten by the supporters and also the media, who are keen to look for the next victim/offender to take over the back pages.
In the case of Luis Alberto Suarez Diaz, or Luis Suarez to you and me, this is a cautionary tale of Machiavellian proportions. Never before, well at least not for a week or so anyway, has any player disrespected his employers, his supporters, his teammates and the good name of football in general, in such a brutal and disgraceful fashion.
Machiavellianism is derived from the Italian Renaissance diplomat and writer Niccolò Machiavelli. His masterpiece was called Il Principe (The Prince), and as a political scientist, he emphasized the occasional need for the methodical exercise of brute force and deceit.
The book is centered around maxims regarding politics and a hereditary Prince. If the Prince is to keep hold of power he must maintain the socio-political institutions that have kept the country breathing and to the people who have become accustomed to such. A new Prince however, must begin by stabilising his power to build a solid political structure. Morality in private and public must be kept separated, meaning that the Prince must be concerned with his public reputation but also be willing, when occasions demand, to act immorally.
One suspects that Liverpool’s Uruguayan striker Luis Suarez may well have read a Spanish translation at some point as he continues to embody the very Prince to which Machiavelli is referring. Unfortunately for him, the modern-day Premier League footballer has no private life and what happens in public and private is what defines the man.
During his spell at Ajax, Suarez was ranked up there with the very best to wear the famous white and red. A return of 111 goals in 159 games was enough to see the Prince of Amsterdam become King. However, as with all good Machiavellian & Shakespearian tales, moves were afoot to depose the King, and the hierarchy of Ajax were no different.
Stories of fallouts with teammates, biting opponents, for which his vampiric tendencies resulted in a seven game ban, and general disobedience and failure to fall in line with the codes of conduct demanded from top flight footballers, meant that the writing was on the wall and Ajax would be looking to cash in.
Normally a player with such a proven goalscoring record would command figures upwards of £30 million plus. After all, fellow new Anfield recruit Andy Carroll signed for the Reds at the same time and he cost £35 million, despite a goals to game average well below that of Suarez. The final transfer fee was £22.8 million. Well below the going rate for such an accomplished player.
Any one of the big European sides would have shelled out that money for him. Why did he sign for Liverpool? Of course, the Merseysiders are a legendary name in club football the world over but they are not the force they once were. No title chasing for this current Liverpool side and hardly a place to get the trophy cabinet bulging. Why did none of the other clubs make a bid to comparable with Liverpool’s?
The answer is already known to Ajax and that’s why they got rid of him. Liverpool may well have known that would be inheriting trouble but would have reckoned that the price was worth the risk.
On the plus side the performances of Luis Suarez have eclipsed his transfer fee and show that in ability, skill and a few goals alone the £22.8 million was a bargain. However, where there is a Ying there must also be a Yang…..and what a Yang Suarez is!!
The combustable 25 year-old was charged in November of last year for racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra. A charge that was upheld and for which Suarez quite rightly received an eight match ban.
The Suarez, and Liverpool, defence was basically down to Suarez being a foreigner and because he’s a foreigner he doesn’t understand that racism isn’t tolerated in this country. At least that’s what it sounded like to these most English of ears! Not a great defence on which to base your case and it was duly flung into the bin along with the various other excuses and reasons given for Suarez’s actions.
Liverpool’s reaction to his charge was pathetic in the extreme as manager Kenny Dalglish joined his player’s well-meaning, if totally inappropriate, support for his star player by wearing a Suarez t-shirt before the fixture against Wigan. All of Liverpool’s history of good work in combating racism flushed down the nearest toilet in the blink of an eye.
Manager’s publicly backing their players, even in the face of overwhelming evidence to the contrary, is not a new tactic. Manchester United boss Alex Ferguson is a master of this skill and continues it to this very day, hypocritically in the eyes of many.
On Saturday lunchtime when Luis Suarez refused to shake the outstretched hand of Patrice Evra in a mark of ‘moving on’ he may well have yanked down the curtain on his brief Anfield career.
In the build-up to the game all connected with the club where united in their belief that Suarez would do the right thing and shake Evra’s hand no matter how degrading he thought it would be on his part. Failure of Suarez to see the bigger picture has brought trouble and grief on him, his manager and his employers and that won’t be forgiven easily.
By so staunchly and passionately defending Suarez, Liverpool backed themselves into a corner. The fact that until yesterday they still defended Suarez shows how deep this club have fallen into a Machiavellian trap.
A trio of grovelling apologies from Suarez, Dalglish and Chief Executive Ian Ayre have stemmed the initial bloodlust from media and the football public, but was their contrition genuine or has Suarez’s year-long spell at Anfield had a significant impact off the pitch as well as on it?
For those of you who have never read Il Principe I shall not reveal all of it’s treatise here but I shall instead leave you with a quote from Chapter 15.
“He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation.”
That sounds about right to me.
Rubbish article
Another one who doesn’t realise it was a kangaroo court. He was found guilty on the balance of probabilities, on the word of one man who was found to be of dubious moral character by the french FA.
Evra instigated the argument in spanish, hardly the work of a true sportsman and then decides to get the hump over a word he decides to translate the way he finds most offensive. Sure he couldn’t even decide how many times he was called it, changing the figure on 3 different recorded occasions. The kangaroo tribunal decided on a figure that Evra had never even mentioned!
You say ‘A charge that was upheld and for which Suarez quite rightly received an eight match ban’?
You have shown a quote, that if it is accurate, you don’t even understand:
“He who neglects what is done for what ought to be done, sooner effects his ruin than his preservation.”
Translation:
If you ignore what happened and worry about what you think should happen, you will cause trouble for yourself, rather than protecting yourself.
So well done on all counts.
For those of you who have never heard of the phrase ‘psuedo-intellectual’ I shall not reveal all of it’s meaning here but I shall instead leave you with a quote from Urban Dictionary:
‘One who attempts to flex intellect that does not exist within his or her own mind.’
Agree with Soloist. This article is rubbish. Pathetic.
The article is shite. I actually started laughing, the analogy regarding “The Prince” makes me doubt youve ever read it(or understood it). Seems like you try to score some cheap “intellectual points”, well YOU FAILED!
I’ve never read the Prince and, while those ridiculing you probably have, congratulations on scoring SEO points with the hipster philosopher set! You’ll do well with this article among that crowd; just not actual football fans.
The point of The Prince is that a prince should behave in a way that maximises his advantage. Luis Suarez by putting himself in a position to apologise for a handshake has also put himself in the position of never having to apologise, through word or deed, for whatever passed between himself and Patrice Evra. Furthermore he has maintained the support of the vast majority of Liverpool fans and has even enhanced his status with them to near god-like proportions. Perhaps he is more Machiavellian than you realise.
To the people sanctimoniously demanding an apology from Liverpool fans. Look to the plank in your own eye and stop trying to extend the Suarez-Evra row for your own political gain. There is no moral high ground here – so stop trying to find it. This issue is not racial and Suarez is not a racist. The whole thing for Evra and Fergie has become political and machiavellian to the point of being discriminatory itself. The media appears to favour the views of Man Utd fans but perhaps they will at least listen to John Barnes, who is the only pundit making any sense on this issue. As Barnes insists – what you propose does not fight racism – it just reduces a complex issue to black and white and actually encourages racism. Suarez has been foolish and petulant – but he is alo a south American immigrant with a poor command of English. The finding of his "lesser character" by the FA in their kangaroo court of "probability" could be said to be racially motivated. The following and ongoing media witchhunt has now become a form of racial profiling and cultural defamation. No one is covering themselves with glory here!
Evra is a dubious character with a sordid past and there is ample video documentation of his own epithets and slurs, including the full N word that he wrongfully accused Suarez of using in his initial charge. He is known for winding up players and exacerbating situations. His antics on Saturday were despicable – as is the fact that the FA didn't address his own insults to Suarez in the first place. Fergie has no moral authority whatsoever either – so you won't get any righteous traction by echoing his sentiments. He is perhaps the most hypocritical person in the history of the game after continually defending the awful antics of Cantona, Keane, Rooney and others. How dare he tell another club to sell their player! The fact that the FA didn't find this unconscionable just shows how inequitable and uneven they are – and that unfairness was what started and prolonged this whole thing. As for his comments on racism – he is obviously so detached and hasn't got a clue. Racism exists in all forms on every ground in the country and the recent self-righteousness of the FA and media does nothing at the root level. John Barnes is eloquent on this point. If you put a club under a microscope, as you have done with Liverpool, you will find it everywhere. But it exists in many forms – not just black and white – many immigrants and minorities suffer too. The reductive and reactionary actions of players like Rio Ferdinand do not equate to an "anti-racist" effort – they amount to retaliation and counter-racism.
So I ask people to please stop being so reductive and blinkered and consider all the complexities of this issue before making your demands. Liverpool, whether you accept it or not, have apologised. Manchester United have not. Suarez paid for his "probable" crime. Evra did not. Dalglish has been vilified. Ferguson has not. Please don't repeat the folly of the FA and hand out uneven judgement.
The point that has now been hidden under all this holier than thou statements was why and how did the charge go through in the first place? It’s like taking evidence from a convicted murderer who his standing over his latest victim all covered in blood with the gun in his hands and listening to his evidence that it was that so and so who was the murderer and that he saw him stab the gunshot victim 10 times. The only intelligent word I can truly say about the FA, the ref, The Frencheat, the trubunal is…. taken from my little daughter’s is ‘DUH!’
Leave your response!
Recent Articles
The Good Stuff
Most Commented