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

Turtyturd

willmunny1990 wrote: »

Who knows what they will try next?

Kenny wearing that t-shirt of Suarez in the post match interview is the most cringe worthy thing I've seen all year.

Who ever came up with that idea should be locked up, Liverpool have handled this case so poorly it beggars belief. Kenny has to take some responsibility for the fiasco which has occurred IMO.

But Liverpool in general don't like taking ownership of things, they have a murky past and this is just another unsavory incident to add to their list of less than favorable incidents that they will conveniently try and sweep under the carpet.

Another balanced and unbiased post from Willy....good man.:pac:

Kess73

Vudgie wrote: »

A true watershed moment in the history of idiotic posting on message boards.

Why so? It pretty much fits in with the rest of the idiotic stuff spouted in this thread of late.

Blatter

Kess73 wrote: »

I guess his "proof" must be as good as that as anyone saying the evidence against Suarez was concrete before the details are made public.

People are believing the "evidence" they read in the tabloids and/or hear from others, and simply moulding it to fit either an anti Liverpool FC bias or a pr Liverpool FC bias at this point. Seems to be more about attacking the club and manager (of either club) at this point that talking about the two incidents (Suarez/Evra and Terry/Ferdinand)

Well in fairness it does stand to reason that there is evidence other than ''hearsay'' as it would be inconceivable for The FA to 1) Charge him and 2) Find him guilty, if there wasn't, so it's hard to blame people for assuming that sufficient evidence exists.

Liverpool as a football club have brought themselves into the discussion with the release of *that* statement and the manner in which they have backed Suarez, so they are going to be talked about and people are going to have an opinion on it.

I just look forward to the release of the written report at this stage tbh.

LuckyLloyd

Also I'd assume the most vociferus Utd fans in this thread have never quibbled with a warning, infraction or ban delivered to them by Soccer Forum moderators right? After all, the mod team is picked by the boards.ie Admins to make such decisions. As such, you just have to accept them without protest, right?

Ordinary man

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Also I'd assume the most vociferus Utd fans in this thread have never quibbled with a warning, infraction or ban delivered to them by Soccer Forum moderators right? After all, the mod team is picked by the boards.ie Admins to make such decisions. As such, you just have to accept them without protest, right?

But if you publicly call it a bull**** ruling(as lfc have done), you will be punished

Kess73

Blatter wrote: »

Well in fairness it does stand to reason that there is evidence other than ''hearsay'' as it would be inconceivable for The FA to 1) Charge him and 2) Find him guilty, if there wasn't, so it's hard to blame people for assuming that sufficient evidence exists.

Liverpool as a football club have brought themselves into the discussion with the release of *that* statement and the manner in which they have backed Suarez, so they are going to be talked about and people are going to have an opinion on it.

I just look forward to the release of the written report at this stage tbh.

But the big difference between the club talking what was said at the hearing and folks online talking about it is that the club had representatives there who heard the verdict and the reasoning said at that time, whereas the internet heads have no idea at all as to what was said and just starting another Liverpool/Man Utd spat on here.

willmunny1990

Turtyturd wrote: »

Another balanced and unbiased post from Willy....good man.:pac:

I don't think their is a balance mate...Liverpool's defense of Suarez is paper thin and pathetic. Their stance is shocking and they couldn't of handled the incident any worse.

LuckyLloyd

Ordinary man wrote: »

But if you publicly call it a bull**** ruling(as lfc have done), you will be punished

Very little difference for my money between Liverpool's statement last night or memorable characters dragging up their personal greivance in every soccer forum feedback or review thread.

niallo27

willmunny1990 wrote: »

I don't think their is a balance mate...Liverpool's defense of Suarez is paper thin and pathetic. Their stance is shocking and they couldn't of handled the incident any worse.

Willy willy willy, what will we do with you.

Kess73

Ordinary man wrote: »

But if you publicly call it a bull**** ruling(as lfc have done), you will be punished

Yes if what you say about the ruling is different to what was said by the FA to you about the ruling.

Right now only the FA know if Liverpool FC have made claims that don't stack up against what was said in the hearing. I am sure if Liverpool FC have said something that is different to what was said in the ruling that the FA will take action.

But until the details are released nobody on here has a clue whether what has been said is true or not, and anyone claiming otherwise is talking utter shyte to start rows, unless of course they work for the FA and were present at the hearing.

homerjay2005

words fail me...

Turtyturd

niallo27 wrote: »

Willy willy willy, what will we do with you.

Was thinking about doing a collection between the regular posters on the LFC superthread for a session with a therapist to get to the bottom of his issues with the club.






Then I realised the regulars are all United fans.

tommyhaas

This whole situation has gone too far, and what begun with an misguided insult has snowballed into an international incident

Working on the assumption that Suarez did use a phrase similar to negrito, a phrase that is no doubt considered racial in the UK, but a phrase that doesn't carry the same connotations in Uruguay, its obvious why Evra took offence, regardless of whether or not he was aware of the words South American meaning. Its obvious why he reported it, and its obvious why the FA took action

I have spent a few years onboard British ships, and I've been called certain things (very rarely I should add). Some intentionally sectarian or xenophobic, but for the most part unintentionally. Regardless of intention though, it still annoys and frustrates you, which is why I don't condone Patrice Evra for raising the issue

Whether it was said 10 times as claimed by Evra, or once as suggested by the Liverpool statement is largely irrelevant. Once it was said, and Suarez saw how Evra reacted, he should have sought to clarify his intention and understanding of the word. Once it became apparent to Liverpool that it had been reported, the club should have sought to clarify matters with Suarez before approaching United to try and mediate between the two players. This is not to say that any complaint should have been withdrawn, but that it would have been the first step towards preventing the us against them situation that has now developed

Evra shouldn't have gone public straight away, but equally Liverpool and Suarez should have sought to clarify the situation to prevent Evra feeling the need to go public. The tit for tat that has followed has been unnecessary and to an extent has made void the whole reason why these enquires are conducted behind closed doors, speculation has become rampant and the logic of announcing a verdict long before publishing the evidence has done nothing to aid, and most likely damaged what the FA's primary aim in race matters should be, to change prevailing racial attitude's and promote awareness of racism

Suarez was charged with using abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour and including a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra. In the heat of any game, players trade insults and so it would I think be naive to suggest that Suarez, as happens in probably every game, every weekend, didn't use abusive words towards Patrice Evra. If this on its own merited a 4 match ban, its likely that the season would have to end in February as that many players would be banned. What obviously merited this in the eyes of the FA was the latter part of the charge, the reference to ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race

The accepted version of event has for some time now been taken as Suarez using the negrito phrase. Regardless of his intention, and whether you look at it in the most or least favourable lights possible, him using the phrase makes him guilty of the charge if it were used in the context of an insult

The dispute over whether or not Suarez's remarks resulted from a cultural misunderstanding can't be proved conclusively either way. Personally, I believe that they were, and I believe this because not being a cultural expert, from what I have read it seems apparent that it is a common term in South America. This however, even if proven would not exonerate Suarez, but would act as an extenuating circumstance which should serve to reduce the length of ban ordinarily expected.

Regardless of intention however, I believe Suarez should have to serve a ban. He may not have done so intendedly, but he still brought race into an insult. You simply can't do that in Western Europe and nothing can excuse a ban as, the old saying goes, ignorance of the law excuses no one. I do believe the ban was overly harsh given the circumstances, and would speculate that it was deliberately harsh so as to allow room for a reduction on appeal and so as to send out a message in the FA's ongoing battle with Sepp Blatter

The reaction to the banning has been something that was fanned by the initial actions of both parties. Had Liverpool and Suarez sought to clarify the matter in the aftermath of the incident surely the reaction that has occurred would otherwise have been deemed unnecessary. Liverpool are adamant that Suarez should get off entirely, which I don't agree with if as reported he did make reference to race. The statement the club released was strong, and I believe much of the motivation was to galvanise the club and fans and harness an us against them mentality.

Much of the reaction to the statement has also been over the top. People are claiming that contrary to the statement, Evra didn't make racism accusations against the the Chelsea Groundsman, which is true, he didn't. Nor though did the Liverpool statement suggest he did. What the Liverpool statement suggested was that Evra had previously made claims, claims of which the evidence he provided in relation to was found to be unreliable. Evra's claimed that the Chelsea Groundsman attempted to injure him with his lawnmower. Obviously this isn't a racial claim, nor has it been suggested otherwise, but it is a serious claim none the less, and one that if proved could have led to the Groundsman loosing his job, a far more serious outcome I believe for him personally then what the outcome in this case has been for Luis Suarez. The point I'm making here though is that this is relevant. The extent of its relevance can be disputed, but having previously been deemed as unreliable witness, its foolish to think that Liverpool's defence would not seek to discredit Patrice Evra, and this being pertinent to the case meant it was always going to be cited

Similarly, the apparent contradiction in stating Evra as unreliable, but then taking his opinion that he believed Suarez was not racist was I think an effort to show the contradiction's in Evra's statements, and add substance to the notion that Evra is unreliable. People pointing at this to demonstrate a contradiction in the statement are missing the point entirely I believe

What I would raise issue with in the Liverpool statement is the reference to the verdict being the result of Evra's word against Suarez's. The whole statement has been put together largely to discredit Evra, and supports the view that Suarez can not be found guilty on the basis of Evra's word. However hasn't Suarez admitted using a racial term? This is what got him found guilty. Suarez and Evra no doubt disagree over the context in which the phrase was used, and this goes back to my earlier point about it being impossible to prove, and either way the context wouldn't exonerate Suarez but would only serve to act as an extenuating circumstance. I think Liverpool have deliberately implicated that it was content rather then context in which Suarez and Evra disagreed, again assuming that Suarez had made an admission

The whole saga is likely to drag on, and the bitterness will no doubt linger even longer. The irony is of course, that when you look at sites like RAWK or RedCafe, that the views of 99% would be reversed if it were say, Glen Johnson and Javier Hernandez involved. Similarly in this thread, you can be guaranteed that many of those who pontificate about Suarez being a disgusting or despicable human being would swap sides with those now proclaiming to be men of culture, open mindedness and embracing the traits of various cultures, if the roles were reversed. As for the references to Heysel, I fail to see the relevance

Now I fully admit I don't like Patrice Evra. Obviously him being a United player and me being a Liverpool fan, I'm not going to. Not many people though could engineer a situation whereby in the course of a warm down, you end up fighting with a groundsman, or in the course of Captaining your country in a world cup, you become a ring leader in a strike. To even manage to become as unpopular has he has in both the country of his birth and his adopted country in which he grew up takes some doing. We could couple this with him not being all that popular over here as a result of his FIFA replay remarks after the Henry incident and conclude that there's at least three countries in which he is quiet unpopular. Now that takes some doing for just one man. This however shouldn't have any relevance. Regardless of how much of a prick so many people believe one man to be, he has as much right as anyone to not be racially abused (regardless of the intention of the abuser) in his workplace. The only way racism can be stamped out is if people raise the issue, and Evra should be applauded for doing that. Even if Suarez's intention's weren't to racially abuse Evra, unintentionally racially abusing someone is keeping racism alive every bit as much as intentional racism is

Even if we assume Suarez's intention to be the least favourable, worse things happen in football regularly. I would class the personal abuse Steve Kean is currently being subjected to as worse or the threats Neil Lennon among others were subjected to as worse again, but because of the manner in which this has been handled, it has become more prominent then either

To summarise, I think this whole fiasco could have been dealt with so much better. Rather then vilify Suarez, or paint him as a victim, Liverpool and Suarez should have clarified what he said, what his intentions were and the context of his culture. This would have done far more to raise awareness of racism, to promote and advocate reporting of racism, and to highlight cultural differences which can lead to misunderstandings in a multicultural society. It would also I believe have resulted in a far less severe punishment and far less hatred being directed towards both Suarez and Evra

Kess73

homerjay2005 wrote: »

words fail me...

You do of course realise that is Alejandro Balbi at a press conference yesterday in his office after the FA of Uruguay went to back their player through him as well and not a Liverpool FC representative. Or do you just want to leave up a picture and let people think it is someone working for Liverpool. The Uruguayan government also had a representative at that press conference in Montevideo.

Blatter

Kess73 wrote: »

But the big difference between the club talking what was said at the hearing and folks online talking about it is that the club had representatives there who heard the verdict and the reasoning said at that time, whereas the internet heads have no idea at all as to what was said and just starting another Liverpool/Man Utd spat on here.

True but a guilty verdict was delivered by reputable people who went into extra time studying the ins and outs of the whole case, and no doubt they received plenty of legal advice along the way. You can't really blame people for accepting that the evidence and reasons for the verdict are sound.

People talking about the details of the case that have been leaked in the newspapers as if they are fact, should hold off until the report but it stands to reason that the story about Suarez admitting to saying a word and claiming cultural differences, is more than likely correct as it would be beyond belief for them to take Evra's word alone on this and according to LFC, there were no other witnesses.

Liverpool are of course entitled to an appeal and have the right to back Suarez, but there are much much better ways they could have went about it imho.

Le King

Turtyturd wrote: »

niallo27 wrote: »

Willy willy willy, what will we do with you.

Was thinking about doing a collection between the regular posters on the LFC superthread for a session with a therapist to get to the bottom of his issues with the club.






[SIZE="1"]Then I realised the regulars are all United fans.[/SIZE]

So not funny.

Will I Amnt

Kess73 wrote: »

homerjay2005 wrote: »

words fail me...

You do of course realise that is Alejandro Balbi at a press conference yesterday in his office yesterday after the FA of Uruguay went to back their player through him as well and not a Liverpool FC representative. Or do you just want to leave up a picture and let people think it is someone working for Liverpool.

Nah it's Ronnie Whelan

Kess73

cambo2008 wrote: »

Nah it's Ronnie Whelan

Nah Ronnie would have a picture of Rafa and would be giving out about him.

menoscemo

Spot on Tommyhaas. Top post.

K-9

Blatter wrote: »

True but a guilty verdict was delivered by reputable people who went into extra time studying the ins and outs of the whole case, and no doubt they received plenty of legal advice along the way. You can't really blame people for accepting that the evidence and reasons for the verdict are sound.

People talking about the details of the case that have been leaked in the newspapers as if they are fact, should hold off until the report but it stands to reason that the story about Suarez admitting to saying a word and claiming cultural differences, is more than likely correct as it would be beyond belief for them to take Evra's word alone on this and according to LFC, there were no other witnesses.

Liverpool are of course entitled to an appeal and have the right to back Suarez, but there are much much better ways they could have went about it imho.

Yet the Guardian are reporting that it could take a month to deliver this well thought out legal advice to Liverpool. This same verdict that they reportedly spent 4 days making sure it was watertight!

Turtyturd

Le King wrote: »

So not funny.

But true:cool:...the last part at least, I really don't give a sh*t about Willy's issues.

Melion

JOHN TERRY

Just throwing it out there, that he should be someway involved in this thread too

DOC09UNAM

Turtyturd wrote: »

Le King wrote: »

So not funny.

But true:cool:...the last part at least, I really don't give a sh*t about Willy's issues.

It'd be awesome if at least one of your posts were on topic instead of trying to be funny.

Blatter

The irony of Turtyturd constantly questioning posters' motives for posting on LFC matters and insinuating they are trolling, is that he's probably one of the biggest United haters on the forum. Subtly thanking anti United posts and often attempting to get sly digs in.

I think his problem is he judges too many people by his own standards.

homerjay2005

Melion wrote: »

JOHN TERRY

Just throwing it out there, that he should be someway involved in this thread too

he has not been charged yet. nor has his club and players done a crazy pr stunt that has backfired.

until terry actually goes to court, this suarez thing is much bigger.

Melion

.

Paul McGrath : "If I was in Glen Johnson’s situation, I'd have thrown the shirt to the floor,"

---

@glen_johnson :

I will support who i want when i want!!! There are a lot of reasons why I'm standing by Luis Suarez!!!

Melion

homerjay2005 wrote: »

he has not been charged yet. nor has his club and players done a crazy pr stunt that has backfired.

until terry actually goes to court, this suarez thing is much bigger.

And i hope all the United fans will be just as annoyed at Terry if he is found guilty. Unfortunately i dont think they will be

Blatter

Melion wrote: »

And i hope all the United fans will be just as annoyed at Terry if he is found guilty. Unfortunately i dont think they will be

United fans are annoyed that Suarez has been found guilty?

Melion

Blatter wrote: »

United fans are annoyed that Suarez has been found guilty?

Sorry, worded it wrong. I hope they will be as "up in arms" if Terry is found to be guilty of racist remarks.

The_Kew_Tour

Melion wrote: »

Sorry, worded it wrong. I hope they will be as "up in arms" if Terry is found to be guilty of racist remarks.

Lets hope Liverpool fans don't try to defend Terry either eh?