Advertisement
If you have a new account but are having problems posting or verifying your account, please email us on hello@boards.ie for help. Thanks :)
Hello all! Please ensure that you are posting a new thread or question in the appropriate forum. The Feedback forum is overwhelmed with questions that are having to be moved elsewhere. If you need help to verify your account contact hello@boards.ie

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

1…4546485051…222

Comments

  • #1412
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    ilovelamp2000 wrote: »
    Stupid rather than naive for me.

    Here's the thing. I kinda agree with Wenger's take on the issue. Stuff gets said on the pitch all the time. I wouldn't judge the character of any player based on what he says on the pitch. I prefer to judge people by what they do rather than what they say, it gives a truer picture.

    But if he did racially abuse Evra he deserves to be punished accordingly.

    Not often I say it, but ya I totally agree with you.:)


  • #1413
    eigrod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,959 ✭✭✭eigrod


    ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

    But if he did racially abuse Evra he deserves to be punished accordingly.

    Absolutely.

    But conversely, there's no way he should be found guilty of racial abuse solely on the word of Evra/Man Utd players.


  • #1414
    CSF
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 34,426 ✭✭✭✭CSF


    niallo27 wrote: »
    Wouldn't a racist try to hide behind the no evidence so far to convict scenario, would he have being charged tonight without his statement from last week, I don't know but I doubt it.
    The assumption that because one did not follow a specified expected course of action that they are likely to be innocent is a strange one at best.


  • #1415
    Fuhrer
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,661 ✭✭✭Fuhrer


    eigrod wrote: »
    Absolutely.

    But conversely, there's no way he should be found guilty of racial abuse solely on the word of Evra/Man Utd players.


    No, of course not.


    Why should a victim and witness be all someone needs to be found guilty...


  • #1416
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Fuhrer wrote: »
    No, of course not.


    Why should a victim and witness be all someone needs to be found guilty...

    Well you need more than a victim anyway, you must agree with that, plus witnesses would be needed that are not biased.


  • Advertisement
  • #1417
    eigrod
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 7,959 ✭✭✭eigrod


    Fuhrer wrote: »
    No, of course not.


    Why should a victim and witness be all someone needs to be found guilty...

    An independent witness, maybe. I'm sure there'd be 2,000 witnesses sitting in the Anfield Road end that day who'd be more than willing to support Evra's claims. Don't think they can claim to be independent though. Ditto his teammates.


  • #1418
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    CSF wrote: »
    The assumption that because one did not follow a specified expected course of action that they are likely to be innocent is a strange one at best.

    Not that strange, how many guitly parties you know provide evidence against themselves.


  • #1419
    Revolution9
    Closed Accounts Posts: 1,743 ✭✭✭Revolution9


    Fuhrer wrote: »
    Why should a victim and witness be all someone needs to be found guilty...

    Hello Lionel Hutz.

    Suarez could equally claim he is a victim of slander and ask some of his fellow Liverpool players to testify. Hardly independent witnesses.


  • #1420
    Pro. F
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,219 ✭✭✭✭Pro. F


    niallo27 wrote: »
    Do you not agree Suarez statement sounds more like one from a naive person rather than a racist person.

    If it's true that the word that Suarez was referring to in the statement was ''negrito'' then it sounds like Suarez is using casual and unthinking racist language. Sure that's not as bad as someone who actively tries to justify racism intellectually, but it's still pretty bad.

    With regard to the question of what evidence the FA have, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Suarez's statement to them is enough for them to go on. If the suggestion from the press, that Suarez has himself admitted to using ''negrito'', is true and that matches up with Evra's allegation, then that would seem to be all the evidence they need.

    Whether that language, inappropriate and offensive as it almost certainly is, would be enough for a conviction of racist abuse I don't know. I suppose the FA's rules are written down somewhere. Anybody got a link?

    On the two separate charges or one combined charge thing - yeah reading that again it looks like it is one charge of abuse containing racist abuse. It was just all the and/ors that confused me. It's been a long day.


  • #1421
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    Never knew Ireland was blessed with such an abundance of amateur lawyers.


  • Advertisement
  • #1422
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    If normal FA rules for charging players is followed my understanding is that this effectively means hes been found guilty but that he can request a hearing to argue his case. However if this hearing is deemed frivouus the ban will be increased.

    A player who pleaded in the past(2003) was given an 8 match ban(5 suspended) when he admitted it. If Suarez wants a personal hearing and is foudn guilty I would think hes looking at 10 matches (5 suspended). However given the recent clamour against racism (I think Blatters comments are bad news for Suarez) they may choose a heavier fine and perhaps no suspended.

    I think the FA are also being very clever here, if Suarez is found guilty then its a lot easier to charge Terry next.


  • #1423
    ilovelamp2000
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 2,435 ✭✭✭ilovelamp2000


    rarnes1 wrote: »
    Never knew Ireland was blessed with such an abundance of amateur lawyers.

    Amateur or not Pro.F has it on the money.


  • #1424
    Leiva
    Closed Accounts Posts: 10,117 ✭✭✭✭Leiva


    Pro. F wrote: »
    If it's true that the word that Suarez was referring to in the statement was ''negrito'' then it sounds like Suarez is using casual and unthinking racist language. Sure that's not as bad as someone who actively tries to justify racism intellectually, but it's still pretty bad.

    With regard to the question of what evidence the FA have, I wouldn't be at all surprised if Suarez's statement to them is enough for them to go on. If the suggestion from the press, that Suarez has himself admitted to using ''negrito'', is true and that matches up with Evra's allegation, then that would seem to be all the evidence they need.

    Whether that language, inappropriate and offensive as it almost certainly is, would be enough for a conviction of racist abuse I don't know. I suppose the FA's rules are written down somewhere. Anybody got a link?

    On the two separate charges or one combined charge thing - yeah reading that again it looks like it is one charge of abuse containing racist abuse. It was just all the and/ors that confused me. It's been a long day.


    Can't argue with that .

    The FA's statement is on the money when it comes to not leaving themselves wide open for a legal challenge by LFC.

    See if they mentioned racism then that would put the FA's rule on racism on a par with the law of the land.
    So if the Liverpool legal people could prove that the word or calling someone "negrito" wouldn't add up to a racism charge in a court of law , then what right would the FA have releasing a statement and a charge with Suarez associated with being a racist when all the evidence they have is he admitted using the word negrito .

    By keeping the wording below the racism radar from a legal perspective they can get their charge across and not leave themselves open to a lengthy legal battle by the club .

    But this does kinda point to the only thing they are going on is Suarez statement which is wide open to matter of opinion ... so I'm experience Terry to walk :0


  • #1425
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    Blatter wrote: »
    The Independent are suggesting that the FA heard evidense from United players.

    First time we have seen this, this makes it easier to prove as they can vouch for tone/context which IMO will be important. An another important aspect is if he calls Glen Johnson the name he is alleged to have used.


  • #1426
    Crazy Horse 6
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,474 ✭✭✭Crazy Horse 6


    Word has it this morning on other forums the FA are going on evidence from other United players in regards the case against Suarez. Case is dead if true as there is no way United players could be used as non biased on this matter.


  • #1427
    amiable
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 12,206 ✭✭✭✭amiable


    JimsAlterEgo wrote: »
    First time we have seen this, this makes it easier to prove as they can vouch for tone/context which IMO will be important. An another important aspect is if he calls Glen Johnson the name he is alleged to have used.
    A United player has never given unreliable evidence to the FA before luckily


  • #1428
    _blank_
    Closed Accounts Posts: 41,926 ✭✭✭✭_blank_


    So now there's a rumour that United players are giving evidence, and it means that Suarez is innocent.

    The straws being clutched at are amazing.

    If the FA didn't think they had an extremely strong case, they wouldn't have charged him. How many times have we seen the FS bottle charging a player over something due to "lack of evidence" - in this case they MUST have some pretty hard evidence, otherwise it wouldn't have got this far.

    Also, it seems to me that everyone is assuming that the only evidence the FA have is the same as what the public have, which couldn't be the case.


  • #1429
    JimsAlterEgo
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 1,917 ✭✭✭JimsAlterEgo


    Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »
    Word has it this morning on other forums the FA are going on evidence from other United players in regards the case against Suarez. Case is dead if true as there is no way United players could be used as non biased on this matter.

    you keep believing this :rolleyes:. First Evra was lying now Utd players. Anythign but your precious Luis being guilty. I just hope to fVck there is also video evidence to shut you lot up once and for all. Of course then it will probably have been edited by a UTD fan workign in the FA, anything but Suarez being guilty.


  • #1430
    K-9
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 43,313 ✭✭✭✭K-9


    JimsAlterEgo wrote: »
    then it will probably have been edited by a UTD fan workign in the FA

    That's what this is all about.

    Mad Men's Don Draper : What you call love was invented by guys like me, to sell nylons.



  • #1431
    Sappy404
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 4,222 ✭✭✭Sappy404


    I reckon that after Suarez' statement confirming he said something to Evra, the FA had no recourse but to charge him. It's the only formal way to proceed since Suarez made public the fact that he called him a name, albeit one he fully denies is racist.

    This might sound like the most obvious thing in the world, but unless there's conclusive evidence he actually did say something racist, Suarez won't be found guilty. The formal process we get in the meantime is the best way of dealing with the whole thing now that Suarez has publicly shed some detail on the exchange. It's better in the long term as it provides a formal procedure and closure one way or another.


  • Advertisement
  • #1432
    Crazy Horse 6
    Closed Accounts Posts: 2,474 ✭✭✭Crazy Horse 6


    JimsAlterEgo wrote: »
    you keep believing this :rolleyes:. First Evra was lying now Utd players. Anythign but your precious Luis being guilty. I just hope to fVck there is also video evidence to shut you lot up once and for all. Of course then it will probably have been edited by a UTD fan workign in the FA, anything but Suarez being guilty.[/QUOTE

    Nice argueing


  • #1433
    Will I Amnt
    Closed Accounts Posts: 13,222 ✭✭✭✭Will I Amnt


    rarnes1 wrote: »
    Never knew Ireland was blessed with such an abundance of amateur lawyers.
    Or regional Spanish dialect experts either ;)


  • #1434
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 0 ✭ [Deleted User]


    cambo2008 wrote: »
    Or regional Spanish dialect experts either ;)

    We're a talented bunch on the SF :p


  • #1435
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    JimsAlterEgo wrote: »
    you keep believing this :rolleyes:. First Evra was lying now Utd players. Anythign but your precious Luis being guilty. I just hope to fVck there is also video evidence to shut you lot up once and for all. Of course then it will probably have been edited by a UTD fan workign in the FA, anything but Suarez being guilty.

    Well the utd staff didnt cover themselves in glory the last time we had a racism situation.


  • #1436
    Handsome Bob
    Closed Accounts Posts: 22,905 ✭✭✭✭Handsome Bob


    Des wrote: »
    So now there's a rumour that United players are giving evidence, and it means that Suarez is innocent.

    The straws being clutched at are amazing.

    If the FA didn't think they had an extremely strong case, they wouldn't have charged him. How many times have we seen the FS bottle charging a player over something due to "lack of evidence" - in this case they MUST have some pretty hard evidence, otherwise it wouldn't have got this far.

    Also, it seems to me that everyone is assuming that the only evidence the FA have is the same as what the public have, which couldn't be the case.

    Man U players shouldn't be giving evidence, nor should Liverpool players. They will all back their own team mate, otherwise they'd be an extremely brave bunch of lads. This should be purely based on ref or vid evidence, or the arguments of both players.


  • #1437
    Nalz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,030 ✭✭✭✭Nalz


    niallo27 wrote: »
    Well the utd staff didnt cover themselves in glory the last time we had a racism situation.

    Thats cas they're United and they do what the want....


  • #1438
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Des wrote: »
    So now there's a rumour that United players are giving evidence, and it means that Suarez is innocent.

    The straws being clutched at are amazing.

    If the FA didn't think they had an extremely strong case, they wouldn't have charged him. How many times have we seen the FS bottle charging a player over something due to "lack of evidence" - in this case they MUST have some pretty hard evidence, otherwise it wouldn't have got this far.

    Also, it seems to me that everyone is assuming that the only evidence the FA have is the same as what the public have, which couldn't be the case.

    No one has a clue what evidence the FA has, i dont think they have ever had this high profile situation to deal with before and they had to be seen to making some stand against it.


  • #1439
    niallo27
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 16,137 ✭✭✭✭niallo27


    Trilla wrote: »
    Thats cas they're United and they do what the want....

    So you agree that utd staff are not trustworthy witnesses.


  • #1440
    Nalz
    Registered Users, Registered Users 2 Posts: 17,030 ✭✭✭✭Nalz


    niallo27 wrote: »
    So you agree that utd staff are not trustworthy witnesses.

    Yes...they are a terrible bunch all of them


  • Advertisement
  • #1441
    [Deleted User]
    Posts: 8,016 ✭✭✭ [Deleted User]


    Not one player came out to say they heard anything when this mess started so I don't think a statement from players on either side would be credible at all.


This discussion has been closed.
Advertisement