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

greendom · 17-11-2011 07:43PM

Handsome Bob wrote: »

Have you ever used a term of endearment to wind someone up who is already quite agitated?

I imagine this will be his argument, not sure whether it will wash or not.

Kess73 · 17-11-2011 08:25PM

Aidric wrote: »

Anne Doyle, apparently. Hates scousers.

Which Anne Doyle? The sportsbroadcaster or the RTE newsreader thingy?:pac:

I bet she wears her number 10 Man Utd top when she says she hates scousers.:D

Kess73 · 17-11-2011 08:26PM

amiable wrote: »

Listen buddy, what's it to you?

Nice tackies.....mate. :pac:

#15 · 17-11-2011 10:00PM

Thanks for that link daithi.

Mark Sawyer is the person I quoted yesterday in regard to the Obama/Negrito case

And certainly the term should not be used when it's not someone that you have, that you know very closely. So even in the Latin American context his use of it was quite improper. But the point is, is that the lines are very fuzzy because this kind of language is used all the time. And is - one of the things that's being challenged by black activists who are trying to reveal the kind of casual and unthinking racism that underlies using terms like negrito, a black diminutive, to describe black people, or to describe relationships of intimacy
....
It provides a space for them to challenge that kind of language and to say that it has consequences and point out what's wrong with it. And previously these kinds of things happened without sanction in countries - in Latin America, people could say this kind of thing and no one would respond.

His comments on the Suarez case are also interesting

"It's about questions of translation or context,
It's often a term of endearment

Jorge Chinea's quotes also touch on the importance of context and explain why Evra would see the comments as abusive

Uruguay, Chinea noted, has a smaller population of African descendants than some other Latin American nations. In 2006, about 9% of the population declared "Afro or black" roots, according to Uruguay's National Statistics Institute.

"If I were of African descent and someone from that part of the world was to use the word toward me, I would probably think twice about what the intentions are, whereas if the person who was saying it was from Cuba you'd probably take it as a joke. And if you said it to a Puerto Rican, they'd just love it," Chinea said.

Both sides can make a claim to be in the right. The real problem for the FA is determining the context and being able to prove it.

It doesn't look good for Suarez considering he was in the middle of an argument but even then, it's not clear cut.

SK1979 · 17-11-2011 10:18PM

I'm a United fan but I find it hard to believe that Suarez (or even Terry for that matter) are genuine racists. However, what I think is going to get Suarez in trouble is that he hasn't drawn a line under it by either a) shaking hands with Evra after the game (to the best of my knowledge) to indicate that it was being left on the pitch or b) made any attempt to apologise now or clear it up properly.

Like it or not Suarez has a number of previous dodgy altercations and its quite right to assume that he may well of said something very offensive to Evra in the heat of the moment, but why didn't he go to him afterwards and apologise. I'm sure it wouldn't of come to this then.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:20PM

SK1979 wrote: »

I'm a United fan but I find it hard to believe that Suarez (or even Terry for that matter) are genuine racists. However, what I think is going to get Suarez in trouble is that he hasn't drawn a line under it by either a) shaking hands with Evra after the game (to the best of my knowledge) to indicate that it was being left on the pitch or b) made any attempt to apologise now or clear it up properly.

Like it or not Suarez has a number of previous dodgy altercations and its quite right to assume that he may well of said something very offensive to Evra in the heat of the moment, but why didn't he go to him afterwards and apologise. I'm sure it wouldn't of come to this then.

What have the previous misdemeanors of Suarez got to do with his current predicament?

K-9 · 17-11-2011 10:23PM

SK1979 wrote: »

I'm a United fan but I find it hard to believe that Suarez (or even Terry for that matter) are genuine racists. However, what I think is going to get Suarez in trouble is that he hasn't drawn a line under it by either a) shaking hands with Evra after the game (to the best of my knowledge) to indicate that it was being left on the pitch or b) made any attempt to apologise now or clear it up properly.

Like it or not Suarez has a number of previous dodgy altercations and its quite right to assume that he may well of said something very offensive to Evra in the heat of the moment, but why didn't he go to him afterwards and apologise. I'm sure it wouldn't of come to this then.

Does anybody have any evidence that he didn't? I'd read Evra was pretty pissed of afterwards so he mightn't have wanted an apology anyway.

SK1979 · 17-11-2011 10:24PM

amiable wrote: »

What have the previous misdemeanors of Suarez got to do with his current predicament?

They simply put question marks over his reputation as an "honest" player. What I'm saying is he probably used offensive language to try and wind Evra up based upon other acts he's done in the past. In my opinion he should of attempted to leave it on the pitch with Evra at the end of the game and maybe it wouldn't of turned into the saga it is now.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:25PM

SK1979 wrote: »

They simply put question marks over his reputation as an "honest" player. What I'm saying is he probably used offensive language to try and wind Evra up based upon other acts he's done in the past. In my opinion he should of attempted to leave it on the pitch with Evra at the end of the game and maybe it wouldn't of turned into the saga it is now.

So if that's the case the FA have to take in to account Evra's previous?

SK1979 · 17-11-2011 10:25PM

K-9 wrote: »

Does anybody have any evidence that he didn't? I'd read Evra was pretty pissed of afterwards so he mightn't have wanted an apology anyway.

I dont have evidence but its probably safe to assume that we would of heard even if he had attempted to approach Evra afterwards. I agree Evra would of been p!ssed alright.

SK1979 · 17-11-2011 10:27PM

amiable wrote: »

So if that's the case the FA have to take in to account Evra's previous?

Come on, not this again. Its been done to death.

Evra's previous disciplinary issues with the FA will be considered, and should be. However there's no boy who cried wolf (regarding rascist allegations) though.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:28PM

And anyway i fail to see what Suarez biting a player has to do with racially abusing an opponent.

Absolute bollocks IMO.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:30PM

SK1979 wrote: »

Come on, not this again. Its been done to death.

Evra's previous disciplinary issues with the FA will be considered, and should be. However there's no boy who cried wolf (regarding rascist allegations) though.

It may have been done to death the boy who cried wolf but that's not what i said.

When i say previous it means something that is fact.
The fact that Evra gave evidence to the FA before that the FA deemed to be unreliable and exaggerated.
In other words he told lies to the FA when giving evidence.

SK1979 · 17-11-2011 10:38PM

amiable wrote: »

It may have been done to death the boy who cried wolf but that's not what i said.

When i say previous it means something that is fact.
The fact that Evra gave evidence to the FA before that the FA deemed to be unreliable and exaggerated.
In other words he told lies to the FA when giving evidence.

Not really, and again, I'm sure this has been covered. Evra testified, the FA chose to decide there was insufficient evidence of racial abuse, but that doesn't mean that they think he lied. Simply not enough evidence to prove the groundsmans guilt. (which is right of course).

Will I Amnt · 17-11-2011 10:38PM

amiable wrote: »

So if that's the case the FA have to take in to account Evra's previous?

Why would they need to take Evras previous into account,last time I checked the charge was against Suarez.

There will be no previous of any player taken into account by the FA,it's got nothing to do with this case,he was only saying what some people might think of Suarez' character from past incidents.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:40PM

SK1979 wrote: »

Not really, and again, I'm sure this has been covered. Evra testified, the FA chose to decide there was insufficient evidence of racial abuse, but that doesn't mean that they think he lied. Simply not enough evidence to prove the groundsmans guilt. (which is right of course).

Are you sure?

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-1097017/We-dont-believe-FAs-damning-verdict-Evra-United-Battle-Bridge.html

While Evra's account of events was also said to be 'exaggerated and unreliable.'

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:41PM

cambo2008 wrote: »

Why would they need to take Evras previous into account,last time I checked the charge was against Suarez.

There will be no previous of any player taken into account by the FA,it's got nothing to do with this case,he was only saying what some people might think of Suarez' character from past incidents.

His previous of giving evidence it was deemed as unreliable and exagerrated by the FA.

I think that is extremely relevant

flahavaj · 17-11-2011 10:44PM

amiable wrote: »

His previous of giving evidence it was deemed as unreliable and exagerrated by the FA.

I think that is extremely relevant

Firstly he's not in the dock on this occasion.

Secondly, it would seem Suarez has already told the FA what term he used so they may not need to rely on Evra's evidence that much.

At the moment the key thing being under investigation isn't Evra's character its whether Suarez said what he said in innocence or whether he knew what he was doing.

Will I Amnt · 17-11-2011 10:46PM

amiable wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

Why would they need to take Evras previous into account,last time I checked the charge was against Suarez.

There will be no previous of any player taken into account by the FA,it's got nothing to do with this case,he was only saying what some people might think of Suarez' character from past incidents.

His previous of giving evidence it was deemed as unreliable and exagerrated by the FA.

I think that is extremely relevant

People are just making up stuff to suit how they want things to go.
The charge is against Suarez.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:47PM

flahavaj wrote: »

Firstly he's not in the dock on this occasion.

Secondly, it would seem Suarez has already told the FA what term he used so they may not need to rely on Evra's evidence that much.

Firstly it doesn't matter if Evra is in the dock or not when you have previuos for giving the FA unreliable evidence.

Secondly I'm delighted to hear that you know why the FA have deemed they have enough evidence to charge Suarez.

Send your CV to a few Tabloids Flah

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:48PM

cambo2008 wrote: »

People are just making up stuff to suit how they want things to go.
The charge is against Suarez.

How is that making stuff up by posting a link to a fact that Evra has given unreliable evidence previously?

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:52PM

TheRealEboueEmmanuel Eboue

i just heard LouizSuarez has been charged by the FA for Racist language. looking for a scape goat in other to save JohnTerry's Ass

JT sleep wiv bridge's wife, he gets a chance 2 play, bridge's career sink. JT call's Aton a blackcunt, JT plays & d ferdinand's r outcasted

Will I Amnt · 17-11-2011 10:52PM

amiable wrote: »

cambo2008 wrote: »

People are just making up stuff to suit how they want things to go.
The charge is against Suarez.

How is that making stuff up by posting a link to a fact that Evra has given unreliable evidence previously?

Wasn't talking about the link,you're under the impression that Evras previous will be investigated when they wont,that's not the way things work.

flahavaj · 17-11-2011 10:52PM

amiable wrote: »

Firstly it doesn't matter if Evra is in the dock or not when you have previuos for giving the FA unreliable evidence.

Secondly I'm delighted to hear that you know why the FA have deemed they have enough evidence to charge Suarez.

Send your CV to a few Tabloids Flah

Meh, I'm not bothered getting into any more childish spats over this and this is old old ground.

The debate has moved on and some people are capable of discussing it with a somewhat more philosophical viewpoint.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:53PM

Does anyone know why the Police haven't got involved like they have in the John Terry case?

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:55PM

flahavaj wrote: »

Meh, I'm not bothered getting into any more childish spats over this and this is old old ground.

The debate has moved on and some people are capable of discussing it with a somewhat more philosophical viewpoint.

In other words i have a point but you are unwilling to admit it.

Very big of you Flah

monkey9 · 17-11-2011 10:56PM

amiable wrote: »

Does anyone know why the Police haven't got involved like they have in the John Terry case?

Terry was reported to the police by a member of the public because it's clear what he said on tv!

Nobody saw or heard what Suarez said so it hasn't been reported (I suppose only Evra could report it)

tim_holsters · 17-11-2011 10:57PM

amiable wrote: »

Does anyone know why the Police haven't got involved like they have in the John Terry case?

A member of the public made a complaint in the Terry case I think.

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:58PM

monkey9 wrote: »

Terry was reported to the police by a member of the public because it's clear what he said on tv!

Nobody saw or heard what Suarez said so it hasn't been reported (I suppose only Evra could report it)

Speaks volumes

amiable · 17-11-2011 10:58PM

tim_holsters wrote: »

A member of the public made a complaint in the Terry case I think.

So did QPR

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

Comments