Written reasons for Suarezâ€™s 10-match ban were published by the governing body in a damning 21-page report.
They revealed Suarez argued his attack on the Chelsea defender last Sunday did NOT harm the global image of football.
And that the Uruguay star insisted a lengthy ban was not needed as players know biting is wrong.
But the FA savaged him in their explanation of why he received seven matches on top of the three-game ban for violent conduct.
They said: â€śItâ€™s our duty to discourage players at any level from acting in such a deplorable manner or attempting to copy what they had seen on TV.
â€śThere can be no justification. It serves to undermine the integrity and reputation of football.
â€śFurthermore, Suarezâ€™s conduct has damaged the image of English football.
â€śItâ€™s unacceptable and such disgraceful behaviour can lead to health issues.
â€śWe also felt that the purpose of our decision should not only be a punishment to Suarez for the offence committed, but must also be sending a strong message that such behaviour does not have a place in football.â€ť
The three-man regulatory commission insisted they did not take Suarezâ€™s previous ban for biting into consideration.
They also blasted Suarezâ€™s attitude.
The report added: â€śIt seemed to us Suarez has not appreciated the gravity and seriousness of this exceptional incident.â€ť
Do you agree with the FA's words? Or are they going over the top? Give us your shout below...