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

tommyhaas · 16-12-2011 08:03PM

It's entirely possible that the panel genuinely felt they needed more time to consider and study the evidence. I doubt any of the panel members are cultural experts, nor do I think they'd have dealt with many similar cases. Personally I'd prefer them to take their time and reach a decision they believe is fair, rather then simply rush a decision

tommyhaas · 16-12-2011 08:04PM

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

Beyond a joke. He either racially abused Evra or he did'nt. This has being going on for weeks now. There are murder trials that don't go on as long as this.

No there's not. Today's the second (or is it third?)day of the hearing. I doubt a murder trial has ever taken less time

killwill · 16-12-2011 08:09PM

manual_man wrote: »

I gathered that. And i think it's stupid, not to mention completely bias...

Our only concern should be that justice be served, i never 'wish' someone bad over another. That's ridiculous

Every one in here is biased for god sake. You are, I am, Al is, Flah is. Get off your high horse.

manual_man · 16-12-2011 08:12PM

killwill wrote: »

manual_man wrote: »

I gathered that. And i think it's stupid, not to mention completely bias...

Our only concern should be that justice be served, i never 'wish' someone bad over another. That's ridiculous

Every one in here is biased for god sake. You are, I am, Al is, Flah is. Get off your high horse.

Ah man you need help

Finished talkin with you

Good luck

killwill · 16-12-2011 08:14PM

manual_man wrote: »

Ah man you need help

Finished talkin with you

Good luck

Whatever.
We are all in here posting as supporters of rival clubs and players.
We all want justice and we hope it is not our own players that are guilty.
Not a crazy concept to understand.
Finished in this thread now anyway

niallo27 · 16-12-2011 08:17PM

I think the delay until Tuesday is to figure out what to do with evra, charge him or not, Suarez won't be found guilty.

Jesus Wept · 16-12-2011 08:20PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I think the delay until Tuesday is to figure out what to do with evra, charge him or not, Suarez won't be found guilty.

I don't see why they couldn't have squeezed that into consideration during the last two months.

16-12-2011 08:20PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I think the delay until Tuesday is to figure out what to do with evra, charge him or not, Suarez won't be found guilty.

I suppose the FA have previous giving out ridiculous bans for no reason to United players...

YouTookMyName · 16-12-2011 08:24PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I think the delay until Tuesday is to figure out what to do with evra, charge him or not, Suarez won't be found guilty.

tommyhaas · 16-12-2011 08:28PM

The-Rigger wrote: »

I don't see why they couldn't have squeezed that into consideration during the last two months.

The evidence was only presented to the panel in the last day or two. The delay in the hearing was apparently down to giving Suarez time to construct his defence

Regarding Evra, if it were found to be true that he claimed the ref was only booking him because he was black, would that merit a charge?

niallo27 · 16-12-2011 08:41PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

The evidence was only presented to the panel in the last day or two. The delay in the hearing was apparently down to giving Suarez time to construct his defence

Regarding Evra, if it were found to be true that he claimed the ref was only booking him because he was black, would that merit a charge?

It would have to merit a charge wouldn't it, accusing of someone racism falsely has to be taken seriously.

YouTookMyName · 16-12-2011 08:43PM

Is there a need for this to be open until Tuesday? It's going around in circles no?

greendom · 16-12-2011 08:47PM

Unless anything is revealed about what has happened in the hearing up to now. I agree.

Jesus Wept · 16-12-2011 08:53PM

YouTookMyName wrote: »

Is there a need for this to be open until Tuesday? It's going around in circles no?

greendom wrote: »

Unless anything is revealed about what has happened in the hearing up to now. I agree.

Thread locked

quarryman · 16-12-2011 09:34PM

niallo27 wrote: »

I think the delay until Tuesday is to figure out what to do with evra, charge him or not, Suarez won't be found guilty.

LOL.

You pool fans crack me up sometimes.

Blatter · 16-12-2011 10:31PM

YouTookMyName wrote: »

Is there a need for this to be open until Tuesday? It's going around in circles no?

greendom wrote: »

Unless anything is revealed about what has happened in the hearing up to now. I agree.

We could well get more leaks as the inquiry goes on. There'll probably be bits and pieces of new info released here and there so may as well leave it open.

Crazy Horse 6 · 16-12-2011 11:29PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

The evidence was only presented to the panel in the last day or two. The delay in the hearing was apparently down to giving Suarez time to construct his defence

Regarding Evra, if it were found to be true that he claimed the ref was only booking him because he was black, would that merit a charge?

It should. Really shi tty thing to say to the ref who is under enough pressure as it stands in a LFC v United match.

spockety · 17-12-2011 12:10AM

I hope the panel get this right. There is way way more at stake than a ban for X matches. If they take a decision to find Suarez guilty, the repercussions will be huge. With the type of frenzy and sustained reaction it would generate, I could not see him lasting in England beyond the Summer.

He would not be Suarez who racially abused Evra, he would be Suarez the racist everywhere he goes, and the personal impact on his life could end up being immeasurable.

mike65 · 17-12-2011 12:25AM

Close this thread 'till Tuesday Eh?

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=EnKdg_H5Z4o

~Rebel~ · 17-12-2011 05:02AM

Hey folks,
I've not read through the thread at all, but I had a chat today which I felt might be of interest to some.

First of all, I'm a Liverpool fan, but I'm not sure which side of the debate I'm on in this instance. I'm not going to blindly support a Liverpool player (even if i've had ungodly amounts of love for him for years) if what he's done is wrong.

There's a Chilean girl in my course, so today I asked her what the opinion would be if in Chile, during a match, one white player said to a black player "Porque Negro".

She said in Chile, and the rest of South America to her understanding, that this would never be taken with offense. She said none of the negative connotations we associate with it exist. She said there are other things you could say that would give the connotations we associate, but that, or indeed nothing like that would be offensive. The offensive words they have are more slang based, and don't actually remotely resemble the words we see as offensive.

As an example, she said (and she's white) one of her best friends is a black guy, and his nickname is Negro, and that its affectionate, but not tongue in cheek - genuinely affectionate.

Now, on the other side of the coin, she said while she would freely say that at home, she would never say that here (in the US) because she knows the reaction would be completely different.

What it comes down to effectively is; What is Suarez level of understanding of the English connotations of what is reasonably close to what he said.

I'm still on the fence to be honest - I'd need to personally know Suarez to know his level of emersion with the culture and what perceptions he is aware of. (We may think its obvious, but how often do you ever actually hear the N word said or talked about in the public arena? It's possible a non English speaker, never hearing this word used in conversation etc because it's so taboo (he obviously doesn't watch english TV or read english papers), might not actually ever associate it with what we are all so completely aware of and take for granted.) Anyone know if the more common dutch racist terms are the same as the English? Entirely possible they may have a different term with the same connotations. If it's the same, it would make his case more difficult, if it's different, then we're basing everything on his exposure in a relatively short period of time, in a pretty sheltered atmosphere.

I dunno, just my new found information, and general musings.

I hope he's innocent, as I frankly don't want to dislike him, which I will If it was malicious.

YouTookMyName · 17-12-2011 12:01PM

Sappy404 · 17-12-2011 02:54PM

~Rebel~ wrote: »

I hope he's innocent, as I frankly don't want to dislike him, which I will If it was malicious.

It's entirely possible that hell be found guilty despite not saying anything he considered malicious, unfortunately.

With regard to the rest of the thread, you'll find the majority of posters either want the book thrown at him for bringing skin colour into it regardless of intent, or want a more common sense approach taking cultural differences like the one you mentioned into account.

recylingbin · 17-12-2011 03:04PM

If Suarez is found innocent, the FA should buy him some petrol to burn down Evra's caravan.

willmunny1990 · 17-12-2011 03:46PM

Sappy404 wrote: »

It's entirely possible that hell be found guilty despite not saying anything he considered malicious, unfortunately.

With regard to the rest of the thread, you'll find the majority of posters either want the book thrown at him for bringing skin colour into it regardless of intent, or want a more common sense approach taking cultural differences like the one you mentioned into account.

How can it not be malicious? Suarez has been in Europe long enough to know that that's a no-no.

He has been in Europe since 2006-2007 so i don't buy into the excuse that he didn't realize what he was saying was malicious, so the "cultural differences" line is a light-weight excuse IMO.

Jesus Wept · 17-12-2011 03:55PM

ffs

Mr Alan · 17-12-2011 03:56PM

willmunny1990 wrote: »

How can it not be malicious? Suarez has been in Europe long enough to know that that's a no-no.

He has been in Europe since 2006-2007 so i don't buy into the excuse that he didn't realize what he was saying was malicious, so the "cultural differences" line is a light-weight excuse IMO.

Did you Rebels post?!

Kess73 · 17-12-2011 04:09PM

willmunny1990 wrote: »

How can it not be malicious? Suarez has been in Europe long enough to know that that's a no-no.

He has been in Europe since 2006-2007 so i don't buy into the excuse that he didn't realize what he was saying was malicious, so the "cultural differences" line is a light-weight excuse IMO.

Cultural differences gets used on a regular basis in English courts by many people who have lived in England for years and/or who have been born in England. Travellers, various religions etc have all use the cultural difference defence and often win, so if the cultural defence line is taken seriously by the courts in England, I am sure the FA will take it just as seriously as they will not want to leave themselves open to any potential legal action from either party involved.

willmunny1990 · 17-12-2011 04:19PM

Mr Alan wrote: »

Did you Rebels post?!

What does Rebels post tell us that we already didn't no?

Its already been well established that saying words like negro can be excepted in Uruguay, but as rebel said in his post, his friend wouldn't dream of saying Negro to anybody outside of South-America.

Suarez has been in Europe a good few years now, and i don't buy he thought it was ok to use the word Negro to a french black person in England, and even going ahead with this "misunderstanding" excuse do you not think its disgraceful that he nor Liverpool didn't explain this or apologize to Evra?

Kess73 · 17-12-2011 04:24PM

~Rebel~ wrote: »

Hey folks,
I've not read through the thread at all, but I had a chat today which I felt might be of interest to some.

First of all, I'm a Liverpool fan, but I'm not sure which side of the debate I'm on in this instance. I'm not going to blindly support a Liverpool player (even if i've had ungodly amounts of love for him for years) if what he's done is wrong.

There's a Chilean girl in my course, so today I asked her what the opinion would be if in Chile, during a match, one white player said to a black player "Porque Negro".

She said in Chile, and the rest of South America to her understanding, that this would never be taken with offense. She said none of the negative connotations we associate with it exist. She said there are other things you could say that would give the connotations we associate, but that, or indeed nothing like that would be offensive. The offensive words they have are more slang based, and don't actually remotely resemble the words we see as offensive.

As an example, she said (and she's white) one of her best friends is a black guy, and his nickname is Negro, and that its affectionate, but not tongue in cheek - genuinely affectionate.

Now, on the other side of the coin, she said while she would freely say that at home, she would never say that here (in the US) because she knows the reaction would be completely different.

What it comes down to effectively is; What is Suarez level of understanding of the English connotations of what is reasonably close to what he said.

I'm still on the fence to be honest - I'd need to personally know Suarez to know his level of emersion with the culture and what perceptions he is aware of. (We may think its obvious, but how often do you ever actually hear the N word said or talked about in the public arena? It's possible a non English speaker, never hearing this word used in conversation etc because it's so taboo (he obviously doesn't watch english TV or read english papers), might not actually ever associate it with what we are all so completely aware of and take for granted.) Anyone know if the more common dutch racist terms are the same as the English? Entirely possible they may have a different term with the same connotations. If it's the same, it would make his case more difficult, if it's different, then we're basing everything on his exposure in a relatively short period of time, in a pretty sheltered atmosphere.

I dunno, just my new found information, and general musings.

I hope he's innocent, as I frankly don't want to dislike him, which I will If it was malicious.

The short answer to the bit in bold is no they are not the same as in England. In fact the Dutch. As with Spanish there are a few terms used, and although they sound similar, one is an insult and the other is not.

The Dutch have Neger, which basically means Negro or a person of brown skin. It is not an insult and is a common ordinary word.

The Dutch also have Nikker, which basically means the insult it sounds like and is where the word it sounds like in the english language actually came from.

So the dutch word Neger is pretty much on par with Negro in European Spanish, and a bit more formal than Negrito in South American Spanish. So if a Spanish speaker in Holland was saying Negrito in a friendly manner, the coloured locals would most likely not kick up a fuss unless they misheard it as the word Nikker.

So the arguement of "oh he lived in Holland so he must have known about what was acceptable in England" is actually a pretty weak one, and one that ignores the use of languages other than english.

Kess73 · 17-12-2011 04:29PM

willmunny1990 wrote: »

What does Rebels post tell us that we already didn't no?

Its already been well established that saying words like negro can be excepted in Uruguay, but as rebel said in his post, his friend wouldn't dream of saying Negro to anybody outside of South-America.

Suarez has been in Europe a good few years now, and i don't buy he thought it was ok to use the word Negro to a french black person in England, and even going ahead with this "misunderstanding" excuse do you not think its disgraceful that he nor Liverpool didn't explain this or apologize to Evra?

That arguement only works if you are saying that culture, language, and slang are the same in both England and Holland. They are quite different and living in one of those countries does not give you an understanding of what the culture etc in the other would be like.

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

Comments