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

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

the incident at Stamford Bridge when Evra made accusations of racism against a Chelsea steward. "This is very worrying," he said. "It could happen to me or to anyone tomorrow. I could find myself in a defenceless position based on what just one person claims I have said. [After the Stamford Bridge incident] nothing was proven and no one believed [Evra]. I imagine he's happy now."

Mr Alan wrote: »

Helix wrote: »

evra made no claims of racial abuse at stamford abuse, it was other members of the united staff

He allowed it be made though, despite knowing it wasn't true.

He was then found to have lied & exaggerated in the hearing.

Mr Alan wrote: »

I haven't said I don't accept the findings?

I've said I'm waiting to see what the verdict was based when the FA release their findings, that they must have substantially more info than has been in the public domain so far.

eagle eye wrote: »

Lets just clarify something here. Using a racial slur does not make a person a racist necessarily. People might use a racial slur to wind somebody up. A racist is somebody who believes that one race of people are superior to another.

amiable wrote: »

How the **** do you come to that conclusion.

He wants to see all the facts.

It's quite simple to anyone that isn't simple

Liverpool face Luis Suarez racism row dragging on until late in the season

Liverpool may have to wait until February before launching an appeal against the eight-match ban imposed on their striker Luis Suárez by the Football Association.

The written judgment explaining the findings of the Independent Commission, which issued the severe punishment against the South American for racially abusing Manchester United defender Patrice Evra, is not likely to be published until mid-January.

Only when Liverpool have received the transcript from the chairman of the commission, Paul Goulding QC, can they consider whether to take further action. That is when the 14-day deadline to challenge the conclusions will be triggered.

The public debate on Suárez is so far based only on the verdict, not the evidence, which is why Liverpool believe Goulding needs to publish quickly. The FA did promise on Wednesday to print all details on its website when it eventually receives them from Goulding.
The possible one-month delay means the saga is certain to drag on towards the end of the season. It is inconceivable an appeal will not follow given the strength of feeling on Merseyside. However, Liverpool will then run the risk of seeing the ban extended even longer.
The FA reserves the right to increase the penalty on the Uruguay striker should he request a new panel to convene to reassess the evidence.

There is also a possibility that Liverpool will face an additional charge, with United considering a complaint about the wording of their rivals’ strongly-worded response, which criticised Evra, to the verdict.
There was at least some relief for Suárez last night when Merseyside police confirmed that the FA’s judgment will not lead to a criminal investigation similar to that affecting Chelsea captain John Terry.
The police will not act unless a complaint is made, and Evra has made no representations about the Oct 15 incident.
Liverpool’s belligerent response to the FA’s guilty verdict, which also landed Suárez with a £40,000 fine, has not softened in the last 24 hours.
The manager, Kenny Dalglish, the club’s American owners and entire playing squad are as one in their rejection of the independent panel’s findings.
While most of English football’s representative bodies, including the Professional Footballers’ Association, welcomed the FA's tough stance on racism, Liverpool’s players took the unprecedented step of releasing a statement of their own.

They also wore T-shirts sporting Suárez’s image and No 7 ahead of their Premier League fixture with Wiganon Wednesday night. The players’ statement read: “Luis Suárez is our team-mate and our friend and as a group of players we are shocked and angered that he has been found guilty by the FA.
“We totally support Luis and we want the world to know that. We know he is not racist.

“We are a squad of many different nationalities and backgrounds. All of us support the club’s commitment to fighting racism. All of us accept there is no place in the game for any form of discrimination.
“As a group of players we totally support the Kick it Out Campaign.
“We have lived, trained and played with Luis for almost 12 months and we don’t recognise the way he has been portrayed. “We will continue to support Luis through this difficult period, and as a popular and respected friend of all his team-mates, he will not walk alone.”
Liverpool know there is a danger of the club becoming increasingly isolated in English football, especially given the response of the PFA, but are adamant that they will stand by their player.

Gordon Taylor, the PFA’s chief executive, who tried to bring the two clubs together in the immediate aftermath of the racism allegation, said the FA was beyond reproach. Taylor said: “This was an independent commission experienced in law and football and they must have had compelling evidence, and it sends out a very strong message to the rest of the world.
“I understand the point about cultural differences but if you come to this country all players have to abide by not just the laws of the game but the laws of the land as well. Referring to someone’s skin colour has got to be offensive — it’s self-evident.

“This is a timely reminder for the FA, the PFA and the clubs to continue education programmes, particularly for players coming from abroad: it is never right to make reference to a person’s skin, colour or nationality.”
The FA knew there was little prospect of the issue reaching a conclusion with the announcement of its verdict. Although the FA has received plenty of support for its response, Liverpool continue to believe a witch-hunt has gained momentum without the full facts being made public.
Most of the criticism the FA has received beyond Merseyside has come from those querying the wisdom of a £40,000 fine for a player who earns nearly double that a week. The FA points out that money goes into grass-roots projects.

amiable wrote: »

I'm sure Aldridge is awful upset over that