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

GavRedKing · 21-12-2011 04:28PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

:rolleyes:

SlickRic · 21-12-2011 04:29PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

That_Guy · 21-12-2011 04:30PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

Typical alright.... Especially given that this is the first time it's happened.

Blatter · 21-12-2011 04:31PM

K-9 wrote: »

Winter is just reporting on the Liverpool statement and what they mean. If he has repeatedly referred to the case without giving more detail, its not great alright.

Yep, Winter's article from the 15th December;

In defending Suárez, Liverpool are expected to mention the incident between Evra and Chelsea’s groundstaff in 2008 which culminated in an FA hearing which concluded that “we find Mr Evra’s account exaggerated and unreliable.

And then this morning's one;

Liverpool’s statement held no punches towards Evra: “It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible – certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.’’
Liverpool were referring to Evra’s evidence being deemed “unreliable” after his run-in with a Chelsea groundsman. The bad blood flows along the Manchester Ship Canal.

Very poor form not to clarify that these ''unfounded accusations'' were not racial abuse accusations made by Evra. It's so important to mention that, especially when you consider that it's common knowledge that a lot of confusion exists about that incident.

tommyhaas wrote: »

Kristian Walsh was stupid to tweet what he did, and his explanation showed him in a worse light. I'm pretty sure though that his tweets were in a personal capacity rather then a professional one, though he did use his professional account AFAIK

I haven't been reading Winter's articles, so I'm not going to dispute the point. Obviously he should clarify that the accusations he's referring to weren't racial, but the fact that Evra has previously been found to be unreliable is relevant, and the extent of this relevance is obviously dependent upon whether his evidence relates to content or context, though it seems likely to be context

I honestly hope Kristian Walsh's tweets were in a personal capacity rather than a professional one but after reading the LFC statement which attacks Evra's credibility, I have my doubts because of the attack on Evra's credibility in Liverpool's statement. And as you say yourself, it was done on an official club account.

I'm obviously not going to accuse Liverpool outright of masterminding a smear campaign against Evra, as I don't have substantial proof to make that claim but the sequence of events does raise a question.

Vudgie · 21-12-2011 04:32PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

That's a crazy remark and while I wouldn't normally interact with indivduals who post such intentionally loaded comments it has to be pointed out that this is unfounded.

Sappy404 · 21-12-2011 04:32PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

A new low for this thread.

mike65 · 21-12-2011 04:32PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

Er it doesn't work like that (hard to know if your comments are just ignorant or designed to inflame) a member of the public made a complaint on foot of what he/she believed he/she saw and the police were compelled to act on it they then handed the evidence to the Crown Prosecution Service to make a judgement on, they decided there was sufficient evidence to prosecute.

No one complained about Suarez except Evra who did not approach the police, though he could have done.

Blatter · 21-12-2011 04:35PM

Warper wrote: »

If Terry is going to be criminally charged, so should Suarez.

The 2 of them should be banned for the rest of the season - absolutely typical of Liverpool and Chelsea.

Lol, your anti EPL bias knows no bounds.

Hangballlouie · 21-12-2011 04:38PM

UnitedIrishman wrote: »

Just a final point on the Suarez case -

I think Suarez has been really badly advised by either the club or his representatives. IMO, what happened was he called Evra negrito a few times (Suarez has admitted to using this but it's seen as an affectionate term in his country) to which Evra took offence (from a different part of the world - it's understandable). If Suarez had contacted Evra that night or the following day then he could've put it to bed straight away with a simple explanation. But instead it became trench warfare with Liverpool countering straight away to Evra's allegations with different points.

Honestly, I don't think Suarez is a racist. I think he is, however, guilty of using a term which may be construed as racist in the country he is playing in and against a player who may see it as racist. Hence the ban. Evra's recollection of events and the admission of Suarez to using 'negrito' towards him pretty much gave the FA no option. If Suarez had denied using any words of any effect then there's no way he would've gotten banned. Which is why I think he was badly advised at the start, explain it at the start not midway through.

I mean if this was let go and next weekend a player started calling someone something that could be seen as racist and he turned around and said 'oh no no, it's an affectionate term in my country' - then that's an even bigger rod for FA's back. The only way to stamp out racism/racist remarks is to stop them using any terms at all like this.

As for the 'where does it end? If I call someone a Paddy is that racist?' then I would say, why do you need to be calling anyone anything. Get on with the game, call him a pri*k or c*nt or tell him to f*ck off - but no need to add extra adjectives relating to race or heritage.

And with that I await a backlash from some L'pool fans saying their club was right etc etc. But this applies to any footballer anywhere. If it was Berbatov to Johnson for instance, I'd be saying the same thing.

great post. I was gutted with the 8 game ban but he did say a remark that Evra found offensive.

A couple of points, imo of course.

1. Suarez is not a racist.
2. Evra is not a liar, even though many had called him this.

This should have been sorted straight away by both clubs, however the tribalism and downright hatred that goes on between Englands biggest clubs is why this went as far as it did, and both clubs are to blame. I honestly believe that it was a misunderstanding that went to far. However Suarez did say something that is a big no/no in the UK, so how anyone believed he could have walked away with nothing happening is blinded by loyalty.

The wording of the FA statement doesn't say the Suarez is a racist and so does Evra, if we are to believe what is reported. I wait for the FA to release the evidence that they have before I make any further judgement, they must believe they have enough evidence to back them up.

Still gutted though.

amiable · 21-12-2011 04:42PM

402204_10150545024758092_735888091_10789313_1394621314_n.jpg

tommyhaas · 21-12-2011 04:43PM

Brain Stroking wrote: »

The bold bit. There were no accusations made by Evra in that instance. Why are some people unable to grasp this fact, even when stated to them simply?

As for being found unreliable, well do you know why he was found to be unreliable? Does the fact that he made no accusations in that case not make you think his unreliability had something to do with his proximity to the incident or recollection of events?

I never claimed Evra made any racial allegations, in fact I specifically said he didn't. From the report;

Evra described how he had to jump over a lawnmower to avoid any contact with it and says that he stopped and asked the groundsman why he had tried to cut his legs. Mr Evra says he was shocked and angry because he could have been injured. He said that some of the ground staff seemed to try deliberately to get in the Manchester United players’ way and that this particular groundsman had suddenly accelerated towards Mr Evra, i.e. with his lawnmower

The above are allegations made by Evra, in the official report that were found to be unreliable. I don't know why they were found to be unreliable, but my point centred around Evra having previously been found to be an unreliable witness, which is demonstrated above, and not Evra having previously made false racism claims

donalg1 · 21-12-2011 04:47PM

Blatter wrote: »

Breaking - John Terry WILL face criminal charges

Brilliant

tommyhaas · 21-12-2011 04:52PM

Blatter wrote: »

Yep, Winter's
I honestly hope Kristian Walsh's tweets were in a personal capacity rather than a professional one but after reading the LFC statement which attacks Evra's credibility, I have my doubts because of the attack on Evra's credibility in Liverpool's statement. And as you say yourself, it was done on an official club account.

I'm obviously not going to accuse Liverpool outright of masterminding a smear campaign against Evra, as I don't have substantial proof to make that claim but the sequence of events does raise a question.

Did you hear his explanation? Its ridiculous and doesn't fit with the clubs statement

In any case, the defence will always try and discredit the the person making the accusation. The fact that Evra has previously been found to have made false accusations is relevant. From the clubs official statement

It is also our opinion that the accusation by this particular player was not credible - certainly no more credible than his prior unfounded accusations.

This is relevant, and does not mention racial accusations. The issue is with those incorrectly jumping to the conclusion that they relate to unfounded racial accusations. Having previously made unfounded allegations, obviously any further allegations he makes are going to have their validity questioned

Blackhorse Slim · 21-12-2011 05:01PM

If it's true that Evra used the term "sudaca" then he should face at least an equal punishment to Suarez. This is a highly-charged derogatory racist term for Latin Americans. There is more than one type of racism.

Blatter · 21-12-2011 05:05PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

Did you hear his explanation? Its ridiculous and doesn't fit with the clubs statement

In any case, the defence will always try and discredit the the person making the accusation. The fact that Evra has previously been found to have made false accusations is relevant. From the clubs official statement

This is relevant, and does not mention racial accusations. The issue is with those incorrectly jumping to the conclusion that they relate to unfounded racial accusations. Having previously made unfounded allegations, obviously any further allegations he makes are going to have their validity questioned

Yeah I saw Walsh's explanation, ridiculous is putting it lightly. I never said it directly fitted with the clubs statement, just pointing out that Evra's credibility was attacked by a Liverpool employee from the get go.

The 'unreliable' evidence line is relevant, but not as relevant as people would like to think. I've said before if that's relevant, so is the biting incident of Suarez, as that brings question into Suarez's character and shows he's capable of anything on a football field. Neither are very relevant to this case though imo.

Also it's ironic that Liverpool gave credit to Suarez in their statement for admitting he didn't hear any abuse from Evra. I assume they will also be giving Evra credit for admitting he didn't hear any racial abuse from the Chelsea ground staff in 2008?:p

Handsome Bob · 21-12-2011 05:06PM

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

If it's true that Evra used the term "sudaca" then he should face at least an equal punishment to Suarez. This is a highly-charged derogatory racist term for Latin Americans. There is more than one type of racism.

What I don't understand is how anyone knows Evra used that term, our own statement alludes to Suarez telling the panel that he didn't hear Evra saying it, so where is it coming from?

That's our problem in a nutshell in terms of going after Evra, Suarez already said he didn't hear Evra saying it.

Fuhrer · 21-12-2011 05:09PM

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

There is more than one type of racism.

Yeah, theres the actual Racist abuse that Suarez has been found guilty of and the made up abuse that Liverpool fans are trying to invent for Evra.

Blackhorse Slim · 21-12-2011 05:17PM

Handsome Bob wrote: »

What I don't understand is how anyone knows Evra used that term, our own statement alludes to Suarez telling the panel that he didn't hear Evra saying it, so where is it coming from?

That's our problem in a nutshell in terms of going after Evra, Suarez already said he didn't hear Evra saying it.

If - and we won't know until the FA release the facts - it came out in the enquiry, it shouldn't really matter where it came from, whether the referee, Evra himself or other players. If Suarez has been found guilty by his own admission or the claims of Evra, then other players must be judged the same way. It shouldn't be a case of anyone "going after" Evra, if it has come out in the enquiry that he used a rcial slur then he should be subject to the same punishment.

It really shouldn't be a case of Liverpool vs Man United, it should be a simple case of personal abuse between two players. If one or both stepped over the line, then one or both should be punished accordingly, that's all.

tommyhaas · 21-12-2011 05:17PM

Blatter wrote: »

Yeah I saw Walsh's explanation, ridiculous is putting it lightly. I never said it directly fitted with the clubs statement, just pointing out that Evra's credibility was attacked by a Liverpool employee from the get go.

The 'unreliable' evidence line is relevant, but not as relevant as people would like to think. I've said before if that's relevant, so is the biting incident of Suarez, as that brings question into Suarez's character and shows he's capable of anything on a football field. Neither are very relevant to this case though imo.

Also it's ironic that Liverpool gave credit to Suarez in their statement for admitting he didn't hear any abuse from Evra. I assume they will also be giving Evra credit for admitting he didn't hear any racial abuse from the Chelsea ground staff in 2008?:p

I wouldn't dispute your first point, and if it was through official channels, he should have been sacked

Regarding the relevance of the biting incident relative to this incident, I don't think Suarez having previously bitten an opponent is as relevant to the case as Evra having previously been found to have been unreliable in his evidence, but that's just my opinion

Yes Liverpool gave credit to Suarez in their statement, but I don't see any need for them to have credited Evra with previously doing like wise. The statement is not intended to be a summary of the case and the histories of those involved, but a defence of their player

Warper · 21-12-2011 05:21PM

Blatter wrote: »

Lol, your anti EPL bias knows no bounds.

Ah come on, the EPL is the greatest league in the world or so we are constantly told. Sure didnt "they", the foreigners bring all that diving etc.. So says Mr. Sky constantly. Wonder how they will portray racism now in their great product.

Blatter · 21-12-2011 05:22PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

I wouldn't dispute your first point, and if it was through official channels, he should have been sacked

Regarding the relevance of the biting incident relative to this incident, I don't think Suarez having previously bitten an opponent is as relevant to the case as Evra having previously been found to have been unreliable in his evidence, but that's just my opinion

Yes Liverpool gave credit to Suarez in their statement, but I don't see any need for them to have credited Evra with previously doing like wise. The statement is not intended to be a summary of the case and the histories of those involved, but a defence of their player

Well I think both incidents bring the character of both players into question and in my mind they are both as relevant as each other(not very relevant), but that's just me.

I wasn't expecting Liverpool to credit Evra for doing likewise in their statement, I was just pointing out that by their logic, Evra deserves credit for doing the exact same thing in the past - (Admit he didn't hear abuse)

Will I Amnt · 21-12-2011 05:22PM

Blackhorse Slim wrote: »

If it's true that Evra used the term "sudaca" then he should face at least an equal punishment to Suarez. This is a highly-charged derogatory racist term for Latin Americans. There is more than one type of racism.

Where has this word magically appeared from coincidentally when Suarez is found guilty???
Who even heard it???
This whole case is ****ing crazy and 99.99999% of all sources are full of sh1te it seems.

Every time something new comes to light about Suarez something else comes out about Evra to counteract it.
All tit for tat bull**** if you ask me.

Blatter · 21-12-2011 05:23PM

Warper wrote: »

Ah come on, the EPL is the greatest league

Agreed. It's the most competitive anyway.

But that's for a different thread, lets not hijack this one.

Jesus Wept · 21-12-2011 05:23PM

Fuhrer wrote: »

Yeah, theres the actual Racist abuse that Suarez has been found guilty of and the made up abuse that Liverpool fans are trying to invent for Evra.

This coming from 'Fuhrer'

killwill · 21-12-2011 05:24PM

bobmalooka wrote: »

Irish (celtic) people are ethnically distinct from white europeans in the same way we are ethnically distinct from black people, so it could be argued that Paddy or mick are racist terms.

That is loltastic!!!

21-12-2011 05:27PM

Didn't Shamrock Rovers have a player that racially abused a player recently?

And a Bohs player got a ban a few years ago for the same?

Sappy404 · 21-12-2011 05:54PM

There's two laws in question here:

Mr Suarez used insulting words towards Mr Evra during the match contrary to FA Rule E3(1)

Evra has admitted to this as well it seems. Liverpool are calling for The FA to charge him as a result.

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

Evra is technically not guilty of this as he has (apparently) admitted to insulting Suarez's ethnicity/nationality rather than his colour.

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect ethnicity to be treated like race in the future, but I understand why there are separate laws for abuse and racial abuse.

So technically Evra isn't guilty of racial abuse, but he's guilty of abuse. And of being a bit of a bell-end, but that's just my opinion.

Leiva · 21-12-2011 05:57PM

Fuhrer wrote: »

Yeah, theres the actual Racist abuse that Suarez has been found guilty of and the made up abuse that Liverpool fans are trying to invent for Evra.

.....

Blackhorse Slim · 21-12-2011 05:58PM

Sappy404 wrote: »

I don't think it's unreasonable to expect ethnicity to be treated like race in the future, but I understand why there are separate laws for abuse and racial abuse.

They are not separate laws according to the FA;

E3 (2) In the event of any breach of Rule E 3(1) including a reference to any one or more of a person's ethnic origin, colour, race, nationality, faith, gender, sexual orientation or disablilty (an "aggravating factor"), a Regulatory Commission shall consider the imposition of an increased sanction...

Fuhrer · 21-12-2011 06:05PM

mixednuts wrote: »

Last evening you labelled him a racist , do you still think he is ?

Ok, show me the post from last night where I labelled him a Racist

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

Comments