Racism - Mod Note on 1st Post - Read before posting.

stumpypeeps

Iago wrote: »

I think they will, and I think they have set it up to give themselves room to do so.

Let's be honest, are they now going to police every game in every English league every weekend? How much time, money and resource are they going to put into investigating every complaint made by a player who says he was called a racist, homophobic or any other type of slur for that matter?

It's not that terms should be accepted, it's not that they should be ignored, it's more a question of where do you draw the line. Why is questioning someones sexuality ok, but their skin colour not? What about their parentage or the questionable bedroom behaviour of their spouse/partner?

Suarez (to the best of my knowledge) admitted using a term that isn't completely derogatory where he hails from. This isn't enough to give him a clean run, but it will be enough to justify a successful appeal and will allow the FA to save face while maintaining their line on racism.

Personally I think every proven racist comment should be punished, as should every proven homphobic comment and a lot of other things. The problem for the FA with regards to this case is a very simple one, they have invested a lot of time and resource into investigating something that was a case of one players word against another, up to the point of Suarez saying he did call him "negro". That means they'll have to apply the same judicious nature to each and every future complaint and that is going to cause them a massive headache.

I agree. The definition of a racist comment is one which intends to discriminate another because of their racial differences. The question here is whether or not Suarez was attempting to discriminate Evra because of his race.

Clearly Suarez and Liverpool don't believe he was. Evra obviously does.

Iang87

Just a few points to throw into the mix.

Firstly that panel should have been changed, if not completely changed then Denis Smith should have been taken off it. No person that close to such an important party in the incident should be given a crucial role.

Secondly just how in the name of God can you find one person guilty on another persons word, it truly baffles me.

How can someone be found guilty of racism when the deciding party and the person "abused" dont believe him to be racist. Sorry lads lets call a spade a spade here you are or you are not there isn't really an in between. (pardon the expression)

Why isn't evra being charged after admitting that he verbally abused suarez? He actually said it to them himself in his statement and its being overlooked.

It really appears looking on that suarez had to prove he was innocent which to me is disgraceful that they threw away the oldest law in the book of innocent until proven guilty.

Finally as a Liverpool fan I'm incredibly proud of the club tonight coming out in complete support of Suarez and effectively telling the FA just how ridiculous everyone thinks they are.

paddy978

I don't want to see one more person talk absolute tripe and say Terry is getting away with it because he's an English International. Rio Ferdinand was banned for Euro '04 by the FA. Where is all the proof on here that people are getting that Suarez is innocent coming from? Are ye involved in the club. The statement is also laughable almost saying Suarez is innocent it should be Evra ye are banning.

Fuhrer

K-9 wrote: »

Well the FA and even Evra accept he isn't racist. If both parties said that, good enough for me. I mean if the verdict is good enough for some then that admission should be good enough for some as well. Picking and choosing bits is a bit unbiased.

And this isn't some fan saying it. The very person who says he got racially abused doesn't think he is racist!

"Hes not that type of player"

ilovelamp2000

Iang87 wrote: »

How can someone be found guilty of racism when the deciding party and the person "abused" dont believe him to be racist. Sorry lads lets call a spade a spade here you are or you are not there isn't really an in between. (pardon the expression)

Suarez was not charged with racism. He wasn't found guilty of racism.

I wish people would go and read the details.

noodler

K-9 wrote: »

Well the FA and even Evra accept he isn't racist. If both parties said that, good enough for me. I mean if the verdict is good enough for some then that admission should be good enough for some as well. Picking and choosing bits is a bit unbiased.

And this isn't some fan saying it. The very person who says he got racially abused doesn't think he is racist!

No, that is bull***.

Absolute bull****.

You judge the incident - not whether or not the player has regular tendency to do it. I can't believe this is coming out of your mouth K-9.

#15

Sir Alex Ferguson quickly insisted that United did not regard the situation as a conflict with Liverpool, rather an issue raised by their player which required the club’s full support.
The Scot adhered to the FA’s request for the issue not to be discussed publicly.

That's a good point, and stands in stark contrast to the drip feeding of the media that has come out of Anfield over the last few weeks.

I agree with Iago, I think the ban will be reduced on the grounds of misunderstanding, or something along those lines.

Iang87

CSF wrote: »

But pretty true nonetheless. My opinion of the Liverpool fanbase has gone down dramatically over the course of this debacle.

and i'll tell you from my part of the liverpool fanbase that I dont give a shít what you think.

What did you expect liverpool to throw him under the bus come on like bit of common sense

spockety

paddy978 wrote: »

I don't want to see one more person talk absolute tripe and say Terry is getting away with it because he's an English International. Rio Ferdinand was banned for Euro '04 by the FA. Where is all the proof on here that people are getting that Suarez is innocent coming from? Are ye involved in the club. The statement is also laughable almost saying Suarez is innocent it should be Evra ye are banning.

In our society the burden of proof is on the accusers, not the defendants.

You should not prove innocence, you should prove guilt.

We await the full details.

niallo27

Knowing the FA, I'm sure Anton Ferdinand will get a 4 game ban next week.

Big Pussy Bonpensiero

stumpypeeps wrote: »

I agree. The definition of a racist comment is one which intends to discriminate another because of their racial differences. The question here is whether or not Suarez was attempting to discriminate Evra because of his race.

Of course he fcuking was. He's been playing in England for almost a year now and this is the first time he's done it, if it's a friendly term to him why hasn't he used it before?

Complete horseshít, he should accept his ban and just move on. If he does appeal I hope his ban gets extended.

uncleoswald

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

Some horse**** coming out from the usual media clowns. "The FA have sent a strong signal out that racist comments won't be tolerated", yet they take no action against Evra for abusing Suarez in Spanish. :pac:

Talk about double standards.

This talk of Evra getting punished for "abusing" Suarez is really bottom of the barrel stuff. There is no evidence that what he said went beyond the typical football banter, referring to a South American as a South American isn't racist.

Suarez used some ignorant language, he is been punished for using some ignorant language. I don't believe he is a racist but the world will be a better place if a few more people realise it's not ok to talk like that. The fact that its a greater punishment then FIFA doles out to whole clubs says a lot more about FIFA then it does the FA.

K-9

noodler wrote: »

No, that is bull***.

Absolute bull****.

You judge the incident - not whether or not the player has regular tendency to do it. I can't believe this is coming out of your mouth K-9.

So, lets get through the bull then, you think Suarez is a racist?

As for the Kenny stuff, the club is entitled to defend their player if they feel the verdict is harsh and entitled to appeal.

amiable

I'd say John Terry hasnt been this nervous since Wayne Bridges car pulled into the driveway

stumpypeeps

#15 wrote: »

That's a good point, and stands in stark contrast to the drip feeding of the media that has come out of Anfield over the last few weeks.

I agree with Iago, I think the ban will be reduced on the grounds of misunderstanding, or something along those lines.

I think we get it. You don't like Liverpool.

I think the ban should be discussed on its own merit. We can leave the my club vs. your club stuff to the children.

Crazy Horse 6

Presumably the next time we play United someone can just say Evra racially abused them and even though no cameras or microphones picked it up, he'll be condemned by the FA and recieve a eight game ban. The FA has come up with an insane verdict. It just cannot stand up unless they have proof.

citytillidie

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

Suarez was not charged with racism. He wasn't found guilty of racism.

I wish people would go and read the details.

They are just following what Sky Sports are saying and that is what the rolling bar says.

Thanx 4 The Fish

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

Suarez was not charged with racism. He wasn't found guilty of racism.

I wish people would go and read the details.

As the details have not been produced, I think you are getting a bit ahead of yourself. The panel will be publishing the details so then we will get to see them and you can chastise people for not having read them.

Iang87

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

Suarez was not charged with racism. He wasn't found guilty of racism.

I wish people would go and read the details.

"the insulting words used by Mr Suarez included a reference to Mr Evra's colour within the meaning of Rule E3(2); "

That to me means racism. Thats the charge and the rule breach straight from the FA statement

THFC

THFC wrote: »

Of course he fcuking was. He's been playing in England for almost a year now and this is the first time he's done it, if it's a friendly term to him why hasn't he used it before?

Complete horseshít, he should accept his ban and just move on. If he does appeal I hope his ban gets extended.

Why accept it if he feels he's innocent?

As for your last bit...:o

kryogen

Iang87 wrote: »

Just a few points to throw into the mix.

Firstly that panel should have been changed, if not completely changed then Denis Smith should have been taken off it. No person that close to such an important party in the incident should be given a crucial role.

Liverpool had the option to veto, didnt have a probelm with him

Secondly just how in the name of God can you find one person guilty on another persons word, it truly baffles me.

This isnt a fact

How can someone be found guilty of racism when the deciding party and the person "abused" dont believe him to be racist. Sorry lads lets call a spade a spade here you are or you are not there isn't really an in between. (pardon the expression)

Someone can make a racist cmment without being a racist

Why isn't evra being charged after admitting that he verbally abused suarez? He actually said it to them himself in his statement and its being overlooked.

It really appears looking on that suarez had to prove he was innocent which to me is disgraceful that they threw away the oldest law in the book of innocent until proven guilty.

He was innocent until proven guilty, the FA have found him guilty based on evidence they have, they have found him guilty.... he was innocent up till that point

Finally as a Liverpool fan I'm incredibly proud of the club tonight coming out in complete support of Suarez and effectively telling the FA just how ridiculous everyone thinks they are.

The FA i agree are a ridiculous governing body most of the time but how you can be proud of a club for the statement they released is beyond me. A statement would have been fine....that statement on the other hand

murpho999

Obviously disappointed with today but I think the problem is that Suarez admitted to using the term 'negrito' and I think his language defence was just not strong enough.

Strong statement from club but wondering if they are better off just swallowing the bitter pill, let Luis get a break, and try and turn it to our advantage; everyone out to get us etc.....bit like Mourinho at Chelsea.

Think it might be better than dragging it out an prolonging the issue.

Also this has got to be Carroll's chance to make an impression.

#15

Iang87 wrote: »

What did you expect liverpool to throw him under the bus come on like bit of common sense

Utd immediately banned Cantona after he kicked the fan in the stands, for example. Lots of clubs take disciplinary action when their players step out of line.
Clubs should hold themselves to high standards, regardless of the FA's actions.
That might be a naive view in this case though, given the stance adopted by Dalglish in the immediate aftermath of the game.

Mr Alan

uncleoswald wrote: »

This talk of Evra getting punished for "abusing" Suarez is really bottom of the barrel stuff. There is no evidence that what he said went beyond the typical football banter, referring to a South American as a South American isn't racist.

It does make reference to his ethnicity though, which is the same rule Suarez has been charged with breaking.

Also it's 4 games for abuse, 4 games for bringing race into it.

Evra did both too but faces no sanction.

K-9

#15 wrote: »

That's a good point, and stands in stark contrast to the drip feeding of the media that has come out of Anfield over the last few weeks.

I agree with Iago, I think the ban will be reduced on the grounds of misunderstanding, or something along those lines.

What drip feeding from Anfield.

Somebody else made a similar claim and have been asked 3 times to back it up. I'd expect you to back it up or shut up with the claim.

citytillidie

THFC wrote: »

Of course he fcuking was. He's been playing in England for almost a year now and this is the first time he's done it, if it's a friendly term to him why hasn't he used it before?

Complete horseshít, he should accept his ban and just move on. If he does appeal I hope his ban gets extended.

How do you know he has not used it before?

kryogen

Fuhrer wrote: »

"Hes not that type of player"

This type of player?

http://img4.imageshack.us/img4/5633/9scu3a.gif

Blatter

Iago wrote: »

I think they will, and I think they have set it up to give themselves room to do so.

Let's be honest, are they now going to police every game in every English league every weekend? How much time, money and resource are they going to put into investigating every complaint made by a player who says he was called a racist, homophobic or any other type of slur for that matter?

It's not that terms should be accepted, it's not that they should be ignored, it's more a question of where do you draw the line. Why is questioning someones sexuality ok, but their skin colour not? What about their parentage or the questionable bedroom behaviour of their spouse/partner?

Suarez (to the best of my knowledge) admitted using a term that isn't completely derogatory where he hails from. This isn't enough to give him a clean run, but it will be enough to justify a successful appeal and will allow the FA to save face while maintaining their line on racism.

Personally I think every proven racist comment should be punished, as should every proven homphobic comment and a lot of other things. The problem for the FA with regards to this case is a very simple one, they have invested a lot of time and resource into investigating something that was a case of one players word against another, up to the point of Suarez saying he did call him "negro". That means they'll have to apply the same judicious nature to each and every future complaint and that is going to cause them a massive headache.

The FA would have spent hours discussing and considering the cultural difference phenomenon before they charged him and during the verdict process and they still came to the conclusion that an 8 game ban is a just punishment. Cultural differences will not be a new defense for the appeal.(If they do appeal, word at the moment is that they are undecided)

Do you really think The FA would have handed out that punishment only for them to say after an appeal ''Oh, now we'll take the cultural differences into consideration and reduce the ban'' Why on earth wouldn't they have just given him a 5 game ban in the first place? They'll look silly if they back track on an appeal given it took them two months to reach this verdict in the first place.

Regarding opening up a can of worms, that's based on the assumption that this will lead to several players coming out claiming they've been racially abused. I'm not so sure this, or the John Terry case will lead to as many new cases as you think. I think they are by and large, isolated cases.

And you could always look at the other side of the coin. Perhaps this ban will scare others off making racist jibes in the future and will lead to a decrease in cases.

Crazy Horse 6

mixednuts wrote: »

Don't know about you guys but I'm trilled with the club statement .

If it's true (as it looks by the statement) that the only evidence was one mans word against another then I say fair play to them .

The only part I'm not sure about was mentioning Evras previous accusations.

It's showing he has previous, will come in handy in any court case. I hope the club bypass the FA and take it straight to the courts.

ASOT

Balotelli: The FA are willing to ban someone based on one persons claim, with no video evidence? In that case, the whole ManU squad racially abused me.

I think im in love with mario, such a lad.