MONTEVIDEO, Uruguay — The Brazil 2014 World Cup is over, and amidst the discussions of the final between Argentina and Germany and Brazil’s fall from grace, there is another much more controversial topic of conversation that people to comment on: Luis Suárez’s bite on the Italian Giorgio Chiellini.

Sixty-four years ago on July 16, 1950, Uruguay was crowned champion of the World Cup. In a match dubbed El Maracanazo, in which underdogs Uruguay beat Brazil 2-1 in a Maracanã stadium packed with nearly 200,000 Brazilian souls expecting to see their team become champions. To this day, that mythical event remains the highlight of Uruguayan football and is a story told to every young child before they're even old enough to grasp its true meaning.

In reality, El Maracanazo is a testament to the well known garra charrúa; that Uruguayan characteristic of strength and endurance shown only in the moments of greatest adversity. This has led Uruguay to be the nation with the most football glory per capita in the world, with two World Cups and fifteen Copa America trophies but a population of only 3.3 million people.

The now FC Barcelona forward, Luis Suárez, is the greatest exponent of said “garra charrúa” in contemporary Uruguayan football. His unwillingness to give up has given the Uruguayan people much joy in over the years — for example, the Copa América triumph in 2011 or the more recent 2-1 victory over England in the Group Stage of the World Cup. Suárez is a player willing to sacrifice anything in order to lead Uruguay to glory in the international football scene.

This is why it saddens me — along with a great fraction of the Uruguayan people — to witness his mistreatmentat the hands of the international media. True, Suárez has not done himself any favors throughout the last couple of years. He has gotten involved in many controversies not only during his spell in the English Premier League, but also when he played in the Eredivisie, the Dutch football League.

Although Suárez is pretty much idolized back in Uruguay, this does not mean we support or condone all of his actions on the pitch. We can be highly critical of the striker's questionable actions on the pitch. However, we also refrain from demonizing him because of his flaws.

This is a point of view not shared by everyone; the British media has generally shed an unfavorable light on Suárez, and the Minister of Parliament for the Labor Party Ian Austin tweeted after the Uruguay-England match, "Of all the people, it had to be the dirty, cheating violent racist cheat Suarez.”

Having the media criticize the Uruguayan football player is one thing, but when a political figure who speaks not only for his party, but also for the people whom he represents, lashes out in such a manner, then something is clearly amiss. Of course, I can understand the MP Austin’s moment of rage. His national team’s dreams of progressing in the World Cup had been crushed by none other than the man who had been the antagonist of the majority of Premier League clubs aside from Liverpool. Of course it had to be Luis Suárez. It could not have been anyone other than Luis Suárez; the man with the unstoppable effort and passion for the game. But it was not the “dirty, cheating violent racist cheat Suárez” who won the man of the match award; in fact, that man does not even exist.

Contrary to what a huge amount of the football world believes, I firmly believe Luis Suárez is not a cheat. Sure he may resort to the roguery and knavery typical of South American football, but the instance in which people claim he “cheated” in the gravest manner, in the 2010 World Cup semi-final against Ghana when he punched away a goal-headed ball, was not cheating at all.  And what these people do not take into account is that Suárez was indeed sent off and a penalty given to Ghana — alas, it was missed. Suárez was shown the red card in accordance to FIFA regulations, which orders that a player who commits an intentional handball in the box be given a red card and a penalty. So, in practical terms, Suárez’s handball has the same gravity as a defender committing a foul as a last resort against a forward going one-on-one against the goalkeeper. Both acts would receive the same level of punishment. And both should not be considered as cheating.

Then again, had the handball not been penalized — as has been the case in several instances in different World Cups with different players — then yes, it could be considered cheating.

Of course, this leaves us with the Suárez biting controversy.

By now, the truth is quite impossible to determine, since Suárez at first denied the incident under pressure from his agent, fearing that his move to Spain would be jeopardized. However, video evidence showed the contrary, and Suárez later admitted to the bite thanks to the demands of FC Barcelona. What convolutes this story even further is that Chiellini, the assaulted player, stated days after the incident that “Suárez did nothing to me … I tried to obtain a sporting advantage.”

Of course, Suárez is guilty of doing similar things twice in the past, and in all honesty, quite possibly a third time; but this does not mean the player is a “violent cheat.” This unsportsmanlike behavior is not justifiable and was correctly punished, but not appropriately so. FIFA's Disciplinary Committee ruled against the striker, banning him from playing nine games with the national squad, charging him with a financial penalty and mandating four months of no football-related activity whatsoever. Which translates to approximately an 18 match ban at the club level. Effectively, Suárez was exiled from the World Cup and can not work at his job for the aforementioned period of time. To serve as comparison, during the 1994 World Cup held in the USA, the Italian Mauro Tassotti deliberately elbowed the Spanish player Luis Enrique in the face, giving him a nose fracture. After the match, the same Disciplinary Committe who found Suárez guilty banned Tassotti for only 8 matches.

So in the eyes of FIFA, biting a man and causing him no injuries is much worse than elbowing a player in the face and giving him a fracture. Saying that FIFA is not the most transparent nonprofit association would be a huge understatement. The 2022 Qatar World Cup bribery scandal is but one of the many incidents which points to such a claim. Suárez was merely a FIFA scapegoat, sacrificed so that the organization could enjoy some respite from its critics.

For people who do not consider him a villain, Luis Alberto Suarez Díaz is the greatest contemporary Uruguayan success story in regard to football. After the hardships he suffered during his childhood, due to poverty and his father’s abandonment, Suárez followed his dream of becoming a football player in order to help his family and loved ones lead  better lives. He also dreamt of leading the Uruguay team through passion and endurance to newfound glory, so that the 3.3 million souls that inhabit this nation can once again rejoice in a 21st century version of “El Maracanazo.”