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

Pro. F · 27-12-2011 11:17PM

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Does that imply that the evidence they saw was all of the evidence? I'd be shocked ( and obviously disappoined ) if they saw undisputable Proof but still came out with their stance. I presumed they were given the result - guilty - but not the proof?

Isn't it the normal way of doing things that both sides are given all the evidence that the other side will use so they can prepare their cases accordingly? That's what I learned from My Cousin Vinnie anyway.

I really can't figure out why the detailed report of the case is taking so long to be released. Surely all they had to do was summarize and tidy up the notes that had been taken during the panel's deliberations.

Ps. Liverpool could be disputing the claim that Suarez and Evra were arguing at the time that Suarez used whatever word he used. Suarez might be claiming that it was a friendly chat and so a reasonable context in which to say negro/negrito. Just a theory of what their case might be.

ShamoBuc · 27-12-2011 11:27PM

Pro. F wrote: »

Isn't it the normal way of doing things that both sides are given all the evidence that the other side will use so they can prepare their cases accordingly. That's I we learned from My Cousin Vinnie anyway.

I really can't figure out why the detailed report of the case is taking so long to be released. Surely all they had to do was summarize and tidy up the notes that had been taken during the panel's deliberations.

Great show:D

If LFC have seen All the evidence, is it logical to presume - given their stance - that the evidence is shaky as fúck to say the least. They could have only said we will appeal ( evidence is somewhat questionable ) and left it at that, but to come out as they did, gives the impression that the evidence is next to useless. If they have indeed seen all the evidence.
Interesting times ahead - once all the evidence is out in the open - for all parties involved.

Blatter · 28-12-2011 12:04AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

I was definitely too rash in thinking Evra made the entire thing up.
I've subsequently apologised.

Well done on apologising(if you did) but my point was that you have a cheek to criticise the posting standards of others when your own posts have been far from exemplary on the subject(and that's putting it generously).

Mr Alan wrote: »

Flah considering your club has been found to invent allegations of racial abuse when it suits them in the past, the high & mighty attitude you've adopted against Liverpool here is very silly IMO.

Really? I don't remember the relevant charges being brought against the club with regards the above accusation?

Surely there's some sort of sanction if it's proven that you've invented allegations of racism?

Mr Alan wrote: »

Also, just to clarify a question you asked earlier as to why if it was a misunderstanding it wasnt just sorted out after the game between the pair, the answer would likely be because after the game Evra added some nice additional details & some nice ambiguous language to what actually happened and went running straight to the media crying 'racist'. Suarez & Liverpool replied in a suitable fashion.

Really? I don't remember Evra crying 'racist'? I remember him revealing that he was the victim of racial slurs, but never heard him mention the word racist.

In fact, according to Liverpool's statement, he has stated he believes Suarez not to be a racist.

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Great show:D

If LFC have seen All the evidence, is it logical to presume - given their stance - that the evidence is shaky as fúck to say the least. They could have only said we will appeal ( evidence is somewhat questionable ) and left it at that, but to come out as they did, gives the impression that the evidence is next to useless. If they have indeed seen all the evidence.
Interesting times ahead - once all the evidence is out in the open - for all parties involved.

It's logical to assume that given the length of time The FA spent investigating the accusation, the length of time the panel took to deliver their verdict and the unquestionable qualifications of members of the panel, that the evidence was solid and the verdict was sound.

As I've already said, the sentiment of the Liverpool reaction has not been all that surprising(although some of their actions have been) given their defiant stance on the issue right from the word go ie. that Suarez did not have a case to answer.

To have changed that stance and accept the charges, it would have been embarrassing for the club. Once Suarez was charged and found guilty, Liverpool were in a no win situation because of how they handled the issue from the start.

ShamoBuc · 28-12-2011 12:31AM

Blatter wrote: »

It's logical to assume that given the length of time The FA spent investigating the accusation, the length of time the panel took to deliver their verdict and the unquestionable qualifications of members of the panel, that the evidence was solid and the verdict was sound.

As I've already said, the sentiment of the Liverpool reaction has not been all that surprising(although some of their actions have been) given their defiant stance on the issue right from the word go ie. that Suarez did not have a case to answer.

To have changed that stance and accept the charges, it would have been embarrassing for the club. Once Suarez was charged and found guilty, Liverpool were in a no win situation because of how they handled the issue from the start.

Logical and the FA should never really be put together surely.

If the evidence was solid and the verdict was sound, I cannot wait to see it in the public domain and put an end to it.
Let the shít land where it has to then.

quarryman · 28-12-2011 12:34AM

Fuhrer wrote: »

Its truly breathtaking what you will delude yourself into believing rather then just back out and admit you were wrong at every single point.

It's actually disturbing at this point.

Blatter · 28-12-2011 12:39AM

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Logical and the FA should never really be put together surely.

I'm no fan of The FA, but given the complexities and consequences of this particular case, you have to consider that this wasn't a typical case that they've dealt with here. More time, effort and precision had gone into this, more so than arguably any other case that The FA has ever dealt with in their history.

This obviously increases the chances of reaching a correct verdict.

If the evidence was solid and the verdict was sound, I cannot wait to see it in the public domain and put an end to it.
Let the shít land where it has to then.

Agreed.

daithijjj · 28-12-2011 02:20AM

el dude wrote: »

Perhaps already been posted. But anyway,Tim Vickery on the World football phone-in should be essential listening for anyone that wants to look at this case with any semblance of balance and fair mindedness.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/podcasts/series/wf

But that requires time, a willingness to listen, and perhaps be educated by a few people who do see the other side of it and are somewhat educated in this area, people with no affiliation to either club or player. Meanwhile....

Its nice to know there is a place to go and redeem yourself if you had previous thoughts of defending Suarez, now all you have to do is agree with an article by Tony Evans, title starting....."Im no expert on South American culture" and you can be cleansed (you were going to hell otherwise). Theres nothing quite like the education on race relations you will receive from someone who edits a sports segment.

If ignorance is no defence and cultural differences not taken into consideration, then why have the FA previously reduced the punishment on appeal?. Thats the problem with the British in many respects, its all deftly angled by media to suit agendas and pander to opinions.

As the Telegraph once wrote (via Brian Kettle)........."the sentence was "a grotesque absurdity" over "a case of innocent misunderstanding". No, not Suarez, but the British woman who offended the Sudanese by naming her teddy bear Mohammed back in 2007. In that case, of course, it was foreigners imposing their rules on British people, not the other way around. Because we're always right and they're always wrong."

Common sense prevailed however, lets wait and see what happens in the future, when the reason for Suarez 'sentence' are revealed. That will be good, actual reasons. Wars have started and finished in shorter lengths of time.

kryogen · 28-12-2011 02:54AM

ShamoBuc wrote: »

Great show:D

If LFC have seen All the evidence, is it logical to presume - given their stance - that the evidence is shaky as fúck to say the least. They could have only said we will appeal ( evidence is somewhat questionable ) and left it at that, but to come out as they did, gives the impression that the evidence is next to useless. If they have indeed seen all the evidence.
Interesting times ahead - once all the evidence is out in the open - for all parties involved.

In the statement Liverpool released after the verdict they didnt even say they would be appealing actually

And i suspect the evidence is being held back from public consumption until after Liverpool appeal, if they do appeal, and if they are not appealing then it will be released when thats confirmed

Le King · 28-12-2011 03:48AM

Mr Alan wrote: »

If that is the word used & it's in response to the derogatory term used for South American, Suarez/Liverpool are dead right to be appealing it & dead right to have questions about Evra considering, 1) as a fluent Spanish speaker he is well aware it's not a racist term 2) it's at odds with the version of events he went to the media with.

As Rory Smith has said, all those claiming this sort of cultural difference is not any sort of excuse should keep that in mind the next time a British couple is thrown in prison for having sex on a beach in Dubai, a visiting homosexual is stoned is some Muslim country etc etc.

Xenophobia is so much bigger a problem in English football than racism.

Mr Alan wrote: »

Negrito is not now, nor has it ever been, a racial insult.

J. Marston · 28-12-2011 03:55AM

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=5wwREHz7k5s

''It's a conspiracy, they all got it in for me, I'm like a modern day JFK with silly teeth.''

Lyrical genius.

28-12-2011 04:04AM

That. Is. Amazing.

Crazy Horse 6 · 28-12-2011 11:09AM

Fuhrer wrote: »

Jesus ****ing Christ

I mean, really, Jesus ****ing Christ.

Its truly breathtaking what you will delude yourself into believing rather then just back out and admit you were wrong at every single point.

Suarez used a racial insult to Evra because he was pissed off at him and he was too stupid to realise what he was saying was incredibly racist.

All this bull**** about Negrito meaning buddy/mate/pal is such laughably embarrassing rubbish that you have to wonder do some people here have mental problems. Its a racist term, same as n*gger.

It is funny to see you desperately throw yourself from one position to another trying to find some way to defend the indefensible , the last one is my favourite. Trying to equate punishing Suarez for his Racist abuse is like stoning a homosexual to death.

You literally have no shame, no integrity and absolutely no limit to how low you will stoop.

Negrito is not the same as nigg er but sure anything to suit ones arguement what.

Leiva · 28-12-2011 11:42AM

Again this thread really needs to be suspended til the evidence is released .

One journalist personal view on the matter has folk blowing a gasket again , and the hamster wheel gathers pace again .

killwill · 28-12-2011 12:02PM

[/QUOTE]

Negrito is not the same as nigg er but sure anything to suit ones arguement what.[/Quote]
You are right. Negrito is not the same as the N word. Very few will argue that.
But under the context of the heated exchange between the 2 players it was deemed a racial slur.

Mitch Connor · 28-12-2011 12:05PM

killwill wrote: »

Negrito is not the same as nigg er but sure anything to suit ones arguement what.[/Quote]
You are right. Negrito is not the same as the N word. Very few will argue that.
But under the context of the heated exchange between the 2 players it was deemed a racial slur.[/QUOTE]

Daniel Taylor, Guardian reporter, has said he has been told that the word used was CATEGORICALLY not Negrito - It was Negro.

greendom · 28-12-2011 12:21PM

This may have been posted before but I haven't checked through all 332 pages to see if it had.

I really hope that Evra doesn't end up being the victim in all this...

http://www.guardian.co.uk/football/2011/dec/21/vindication-downside-patrice-evra-luis-suarez?CMP=twt_gu

Blatter · 28-12-2011 12:31PM

greendom wrote: »

This may have been posted before but I haven't checked through all 332 pages to see if it had.

I really hope that Evra doesn't end up being the victim in all this...

It's already happened due to stupid fans, irresponsible journalists, calculated leaks and through Liverpool FC's statement that attacked his credibility while failing to clarify that he doesn't have a history of unfounded allegations of racial abuse.

Yep, Evra is now labelled as somebody who ''plays the race card''

Thanx 4 The Fish · 28-12-2011 12:34PM

Blatter wrote: »

It's already happened due to stupid fans, irresponsible journalists, calculated leaks and through Liverpool FC's statement that attacked his credibility while failing to clarify that he doesn't have a history of unfounded allegations of racial abuse.

Yep, Evra is now labelled as somebody who ''plays the race card''

He was already labelled as that well before the Suarez incident occurred.

When is the report published? Have I missed it?

Thanx 4 The Fish · 28-12-2011 12:37PM

Just checked, not been released yet. This is going around in circles. Thread closed until something new comes to light.

Morzadec · 31-12-2011 06:30PM

http://www.thefa.com/TheFA/Disciplinary/NewsAndFeatures/2011/~/media/Files/PDF/TheFA/Disciplinary/Written%20reasons/FA%20v%20Suarez%20Written%20Reasons%20of%20Regulatory%20Commission.ashx

31-12-2011 06:34PM

****.

Samich · 31-12-2011 06:36PM

no need for another thread.

31-12-2011 06:38PM

It's a long read.

I'd advise everyone to have a read of it, ie both sides of the argument

ASOT · 31-12-2011 06:38PM

Samich wrote: »

no need for another thread.

their is when the lfc thread is being raped, they can be merged dont cry.

Samich · 31-12-2011 06:41PM

ASOT wrote: »

their is when the lfc thread is being raped, they can be merged dont cry.

Sure it's related to lfc?????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????????///

What is supposed to go in the superthread? The length of grass in Anfield?

Helix · 31-12-2011 06:42PM

"Mr Comolli confirmed under cross-examination
that he believed that what he was told by Mr Suarez in this meeting was that the words he
had used to Mr Evra translated as "Why, because you are black"."

J. Marston · 31-12-2011 06:44PM

Giggsy11 · 31-12-2011 06:45PM

In our judgment, Mr Suarez's use of the term was not intended as an attempt at conciliation or to establish rapport; neither was it meant in a conciliatory and friendly way. It was not explained by any feeling on Mr Suarez’s part that a linguistic or cultural relationship had been established between them or that the context was one of informal social relations. The video footage, when viewed in detail and when looked at as a whole,
shows that the players continued their animosity throughout this incident. Their hostility is shown in their actions and demeanour before, at the moment of, and after Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word.

There were clearly a number of changes in Mr Suarez's account, both of the incident in the goalmouth and the incident where Mr Suarez admitted to using the word “negro” between his initial account as reported by Mr Dalglish and Mr Comolli, his interview on 2 November, his witness statement, and his case as presented at the hearing.

We rejected the evidence of Mr Suarez on these points. The pinching of the skin, and Mr Suarez's admitted use of the word "negro" when speaking to Mr Evra, took place in the context of heated exchanges between the players. Mr Suarez had fouled Mr Evra in the 58th minute. Mr Evra confronted Mr Suarez in the 63rd minute and complained forcefully
about the foul. Their facial expressions, gesturing and physical movement showed their mutual animosity throughout these exchanges.

Mr Suarez's account of his admitted use of the word "negro" changed several times. He seemed unsure of when the admitted use took place and what triggered it. His account seemed to change in an attempt to fit in with the video evidence.

Proving who is liar here.

In total, Mr Suarez used the word "negro" or "negros" seven times in the penalty area. On each occasion, the words were insulting. On each occasion, Mr Suarez breached Rule E3(1). Accordingly, the Charge is proved.

So Evra didn't lie when he said he said 10 times (Which is close enough).

eigrod · 31-12-2011 06:48PM

I love this piece :

The FA applied for Mrs Wiley, the Assistant Club Secretary of Manchester United to be permitted to attend the hearing while Mr Evra gave evidence for the purpose of reducing his anxiety, which we allowed.

Poor Evra needed a mammy figure to accompany him. FFS.

YouTookMyName · 31-12-2011 06:53PM

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

Comments