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

manual_man · 01-01-2012 06:54PM

opr wrote: »

Taken from another forum.

RedLFCBlood over on LFCREDS, here is video of Evra going down after contact with Suarez. Before you watch it, here are the FA's words:
In the 58th minute of the game, Mr Suarez fouled Mr Evra between the edge of the Manchester United penalty area and the corner flag at the Kop end. It seemed to us to be a deliberate foul, and the referee awarded a free kick. The foul was committed by Mr Suarez kicking Mr Evra on his right knee. Mr Evra explained that he had previously had a bad problem in that knee. He remained on the ground receiving medical treatment for about one minute after the tackle.

2nd point: Mr Evra said that while he was lying on the ground, Mr Kuyt came up to him and said "stand up, you ****ing prick". Mr Kuyt said "This is untrue. What I did say was something to the effect of "Stand up, stand up", as if to say that it had been a foul but he was making too much of it". The video footage did not show Mr Kuyt speaking to Mr Evra at this time, but Mr Kuyt admitted that he did so.

Now watch the video starting at about 1:15. Suarez did not kick Evra deliberately, and Kuyt did say something to Evra. Both points are obvious on the video, yet the FA gets both points horrendously wrong. They had zero desire to get the facts right. They put their blinders on and set out to find whatever they could to convict Suarez, discounting any evidence that didn't fit their wishes.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=LH50lwwBRms

Opr

That footage is shocking

Now maybe Evra did get a knock on his knee, but to the neutral it looks like total simulation and a blatant attempt to get Suarez booked. Of course he was up and running like Billy Whizz in no time. Now before anybody accuses Suarez of simulation i'll admit yes, some times he goes down far too easily. But the difference here is that this forms a part of Evra's prosecution, and it's blatant to see he knows quite well he wasn't kicked by Suarez. The fact that he states (and has continued to state) that Suarez deliberately 'kicked' his knee (there was no kicking, possibly just a banging together of knees) raises serious doubts about the character, and reliability, of Patrice Evra. Frankly, i'm quite disgusted after seeing that clip

eigrod · 01-01-2012 06:56PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

The footage the FA had access to may not have shown Kuyt and Evra talking to each other. They didn't say it didn't happen, just that the footage they had didn't show it.

Yet they have other footage, not in the public domain, that they claim back up Evra's version of events.

They seem to be very selective in the footage they chose to use in their deliberations. If they couldn't find footage showing Kuyt and Evra talking to each other, then they're not doing their job very well, which is the primary grievances of those of us saying it was a very poor report.

spockety · 01-01-2012 07:01PM

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

I love the way every keyboard warrior has become both a linguistics and legal expert on account of this matter.

Beyond reasonable doubt is only ever used in criminal trials, no criminal charge was proferred in this instance so there is no need to prove anything beyond reasonable doubt. It was a simple breach of an FA Rule, a civil law matter so the civil law standard applied. There is nothing strange or unusual about this. Again it shows your naivete in legal matters.

Suarez was convicted on the basis of his admitted use of negro, and they believed Evra's context to it because it tallied with the TV footage. That's a perfectly reasonable thing to do. Suarez wasn't credible because he said that basically it was a friendly exchange when TV footage indicates the opposite. Much like the telephone records in Joe O'Reilly.

You literally have to suspend all reason to think Suarez is innocent here.

Thanks for highlighting my naievety...

But as I pointed out already, what Suarez is accused of is actually a criminal offense. He has not been given the benefit of a criminal trial however. That is the problem.

This was no intentional foul, or off the ball head butt. The man has been tarred as a racist.

tommyhaas · 01-01-2012 07:01PM

eigrod wrote: »

Yet they have other footage, not in the public domain, that they claim back up Evra's version of events.

They seem to be very selective in the footage they chose to use in their deliberations. If they couldn't find footage showing Kuyt and Evra talking to each other, then they're not doing their job very well, which is the primary grievances of those of us saying it was a very poor report.

Maybe there is none? Why would they hide that of all things? Particularly when both Evra and Kuyt claimed they had spoken

tommyhaas · 01-01-2012 07:04PM

spockety wrote: »

Thanks for highlighting my naievety...

But as I pointed out already, what Suarez is accused of is actually a criminal offense. He has not been given the benefit of a criminal trial however. That is the problem.

This was no intentional foul, or off the ball head butt. The man has been tarred as a racist.

He broke FA rules, that's what the FA are dealing with, not the law of the land. Its not up to them to administer that. Should every player up on a misconduct charge or similar have an FA equivalent of a criminal trial?

That's the FA standard, balance of probabilities. It was never an issue for anyone previously, so to start complaining about it now is embarrassing tbh

SoulTrader · 01-01-2012 07:04PM

manual_man wrote: »

That footage is shocking

Now maybe Evra did get a knock on his knee, but to the neutral it looks like total simulation and a blatant attempt to get Suarez booked. Of course he was up and running like Billy Whizz in no time. Now before anybody accuses Suarez of simulation i'll admit yes, some times he goes down far too easily. But the difference here is that this forms a part of Evra's prosecution, and it's blatant to see he knows quite well he wasn't kicked by Suarez. The fact that he states (and has continued to state) that Suarez deliberately 'kicked' his knee (there was no kicking, possibly just a banging together of knees) raises serious doubts about the character, and reliability, of Patrice Evra. Frankly, i'm quite disgusted after seeing that clip

Whether or not Suarez "deliberately" fouled / kicked Evra is not the issue. The issue is about the use of "insulting words, which include reference to another player's color".

Your post just seems like the usual tactic from some people on here of deflecting attention from the issue at hand, and blaming / undermining anyone who dares to call LFC and Suarez to account for their actions.

parker kent · 01-01-2012 07:08PM

opr wrote: »

Taken from another forum.

Two things: You need to view the foul from a number of angles before deciding if it was a deliberate foul. Even at that, it is still a matter of opinion. Nonetheless if you view it from the actual TV footage it appears to be much more deliberate. Sky have been showing footage today from their TV cameras and it looks very different to that amateur footage.

Secondly, that is obviously not the footage the FA report is referring to in that passage. It is quite clearly amateur footage shot from the crowd, unless it was handed to them in the original format, presumably they could not use it.

spockety · 01-01-2012 07:09PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

He broke FA rules, that's what the FA are dealing with, not the law of the land. Its not up to them to administer that. Should every player up on a misconduct charge or similar have an FA equivalent of a criminal trial?

That's the FA standard, balance of probabilities. It was never an issue for anyone previously, so to start complaining about it now is embarrassing tbh

There it is again, "embarrassing".

Blatter · 01-01-2012 07:10PM

@tommyhaas

You quoted me earlier questioning me saying that people are legally entitled to call Suarez a racist.

I was getting that understanding from Martin Lipton who was just asked does he think Suarez is a racist and he said;

Originally posted by Martin Lipton

As said, repeatedly, in my book, YES. And a view that would hold up legally. But accept others would disagree

manual_man · 01-01-2012 07:13PM

SoulTrader wrote: »

manual_man wrote: »

That footage is shocking

Now maybe Evra did get a knock on his knee, but to the neutral it looks like total simulation and a blatant attempt to get Suarez booked. Of course he was up and running like Billy Whizz in no time. Now before anybody accuses Suarez of simulation i'll admit yes, some times he goes down far too easily. But the difference here is that this forms a part of Evra's prosecution, and it's blatant to see he knows quite well he wasn't kicked by Suarez. The fact that he states (and has continued to state) that Suarez deliberately 'kicked' his knee (there was no kicking, possibly just a banging together of knees) raises serious doubts about the character, and reliability, of Patrice Evra. Frankly, i'm quite disgusted after seeing that clip

Whether or not Suarez "deliberately" fouled / kicked Evra is not the issue. The issue is about the use of "insulting words, which include reference to another player's color".

Your post just seems like the usual tactic from some people on here of deflecting attention from the issue at hand, and blaming / undermining anyone who dares to call LFC and Suarez to account for their actions.

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

Blatter · 01-01-2012 07:15PM

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

But this is all irrelevant because Evra didn't lie.

Several people, including Liverpool fans, can remember seeing the angle on Sky that clearly showed that Evra was kicked that day.

carlcon · 01-01-2012 07:16PM

It's infuriating that the posts actually talking about the case and showing how in-depth the report was are now being spammed out of focus by discussion about a cam-phone recording about a tackle that isn't at all relevant... not to mention a poor quality recording that is on the *exact* opposite side of where contact was made, therefore showing us nothing, and adding nothing of use.

Unless, of course, you're a fanboy looking to skip over the truth.

SantryRed · 01-01-2012 07:16PM

I see mister men is gone off again :rolleyes:

K-9 · 01-01-2012 07:17PM

Brain Stroking wrote: »

And i find it funny. The whole thing. No one has said Luis Suarez is a racist prior to yesterday's report. The report muddies that assumption though somewhat doesnt it? The fact that Liverpool alleged it was nothing more than an innocent negrito shows just how far off the mark they were. Kuyt even gave evidence that said Suarez told him he had called Evra "Negro". TV footage was presented which showed Suarez saying things more than once. He even specifically said "because you are black" when Evra asked him why.
t's not funny actually. It's hilarious.

Jaysus, that must be some inside report you have because in mine it says the tv evidence doesn't show Suarez saying much at all, because in most of it they can't see what he is saying at all.

Fuhrer · 01-01-2012 07:18PM

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

Yeah but the problem with your "point" is that as anyone who saw the actual footage of the incident on TV saw Suarez swinging his boot straight into Evras knee, nowhere near the ball. The bull**** camera phone footage from behind where you cant even see it, isnt a good basis for an argument.

lordgoat · 01-01-2012 07:18PM

Trilla wrote: »

Baz did someone answer this?

Here you go Trills, Blatter chipped in with an answer. Everyone else was pretty quiet.

Blatter wrote: »

Here is how Suarez changed his story three times.

I feel people are overlooking the role of Kuyt and Comolli in this.

Could someone explain how both Kuyt and Comolli, in two different languages , could interpret what Suarez as having said as ''because you are black''.

Kuyt saying that he could have misinterpreted it, and Comolli trying to cover up the word what he had initially said and then claim it was all a misunderstanding.

Seems a remarkable coincidence that you could have two original interpretations(that were damning and in line with Evra's version of events), in two different languages, that were both conveniently ''misunderstood'' when it was found they didn't match with Suarez' statement.

And do people not find it odd that Suarez changed his story three times to suit video evidence?

And Suarez was found to have clearly lied when he said he tried to pinch Evra ''to diffuse the situation''. Even his own lawyer admitted that there was no way Suarez was trying to diffuse any situation there! So why did he lie?

And all this, after Suarez admitting he used the term 'negro', after Evra's testimony matching up to that of the ref, his teammates, the Canal+ interviewer and video evidence.

Yet there's not enough hard evidence and some people still claim it's essentially one man's word against another's, despite Suarez' lawyer agreeing that it wasn't?

I think the only court Liverpool can bring this to is the CAS, and afaik they also reach their verdicts on the balance of probabilities.

LuckyLloyd wrote: »

Do you believe that the 8 match ban was justified though?

Well if a fan was found guilty of racially abusing a player i think he gets a life time ban. So yep 8 is the least he could have gotten.

spockety wrote: »

There it is again, "embarrassing".

well if anyone was going to point out an embarrassing post, you'd be top of my list to do it. No offense but you really do need to at least try and see the two sides of this argument.

ilovelamp, you've made some great posts, i'd like to hope if this happened to a player at my club i'd reason things out in the same manner.

manual_man · 01-01-2012 07:19PM

Blatter wrote: »

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

But this is all irrelevant because Evra didn't lie.

Several people, including Liverpool fans, can remember seeing the angle on Sky that clearly showed that Evra was kicked that day.

He wasn't kicked on the knee. Do you dispute that? Watch the clip again...

clubberlang12 · 01-01-2012 07:20PM

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

But he hadn't lied about Suarez kicking him!!!! Good Lord, some of the assumptions and scenario's being dreamt up here are unbelievable.

Okay, so going from your point of reasoning. Suarez pinches Evra's arm and pats the back of his head but lies saying he did it in a conciliatory fashion,......................who's to say he didn't lie about what he said to Evra. This also raises doubts about Suarez's character!!!

Nalz · 01-01-2012 07:24PM

lordgoat wrote: »

Here you go Trills, Blatter chipped in with an answer. Everyone else was pretty quiet
.

Thanks

SantryRed · 01-01-2012 07:24PM

Sick of people seeing one thing and not the other on this thread.

That link that opr put up is ABSOLUTE bollocks. Here at 2:50 you clearly see Suarez kick Evra, so go again manual_man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNGsevm84o

tommyhaas · 01-01-2012 07:25PM

spockety wrote: »

There it is again, "embarrassing".

I apologise if my post came across condescendingly, that wasn't my intention.

My point was that to complain about an accepted process, only after it has ruled against you isn't a legitimate way to go about things. The principal of the balance of probabilities is an accepted one, and has been for a long time, both in terms of the FA's disciplinary process, and legally. To complain about it now is just clutching at straws IMO, as if you had an issue with the process, why was it not raised previously

Blatter wrote: »

@tommyhaas

You quoted me earlier questioning me saying that people are legally entitled to call Suarez a racist.

I was getting that understanding from Martin Lipton who was just asked does he think Suarez is a racist and he said;

My understanding was that only on conviction, could someone legally be labelled in that way, ie a man found guilty of burglary can legally be labelled a burglar etc, but perhaps I'm wrong

manual_man · 01-01-2012 07:25PM

Fuhrer wrote: »

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

Yeah but the problem with your "point" is that as anyone who saw the actual footage of the incident on TV saw Suarez swinging his boot straight into Evras knee, nowhere near the ball. The bull**** camera phone footage from behind where you cant even see it, isnt a good basis for an argument.

Suarez's foot was barely off the ground. Nowhere near high enough to have kicked Evra's knee. No other footage is needed to prove this, it is as clear as day from the clip. He stretched his leg across Evra, in an attempt to outmuscle him. There was no kicking of anyone's knee, anyone who insists there was is totally and utterly kidding themselves

Blatter · 01-01-2012 07:26PM

manual_man wrote: »

He wasn't kicked on the knee. Do you dispute that? Watch the clip again...

He was kicked on the knee. That clip proves nothing, nada, zilch.

There are other camera angles available, that people have actually seen, that clearly shows he was kicked in the knee in that instance.

SantryRed · 01-01-2012 07:27PM

manual_man wrote: »

Suarez's foot was barely off the ground. Nowhere near high enough to have kicked Evra's knee. No other footage is needed to prove this, it is as clear as day from the clip. He stretched his leg across Evra, in an attempt to outmuscle him. There was no kicking of anyone's knee, anyone who insists there was is totally and utterly kidding themselves

Just so you don't miss it.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNGsevm84o

2:50 in. Definite contact. High enough off the ground to hit Evra's knee.

Fuhrer · 01-01-2012 07:27PM

manual_man wrote: »

Suarez's foot was barely off the ground. Nowhere near high enough to have kicked Evra's knee. No other footage is needed to prove this, it is as clear as day from the clip. He stretched his leg across Evra, in an attempt to outmuscle him. There was no kicking of anyone's knee, anyone who insists there was is totally and utterly kidding themselves

I was just about to rip the clip from the video I downloaded back in the day but I see SantryRed has already posted the clip, clearly showing your point to be 100% bull****.

So, going to apologise then?

clubberlang12 · 01-01-2012 07:28PM

manual_man wrote: »

There was no kicking of anyone's knee, anyone who insists there was is totally and utterly kidding themselves

This is my favourite bit..........

SoulTrader · 01-01-2012 07:28PM

manual_man wrote: »

Not at all. It raises questions about Evra's character. He used Suarez 'kicking' him, as an excuse for starting a confrontation. If Evra has blatantly lied about this what's to say he hasn't blatantly lied about the things he insists Suarez said to him. Within a trial, character can make or break a case, and in this case this raises serious doubts as to Evra's character, and whether what he has accused Suarez of saying to him should be believed

I don't see where Evra has lied about this. He was fouled by Suarez, as shown on TV and seen by the referee, who awarded a free kick. From the report, Suarez's own admission was that it was a normal foul.

Mr Suarez said that he replied to Mr Evra's question "Why did you kick me?" by saying "que habia sido una falta normal", meaning "it was just a normal foul".

spockety · 01-01-2012 07:32PM

tommyhaas wrote: »

I apologise if my post came across condescendingly, that wasn't my intention.

My point was that to complain about an accepted process, only after it has ruled against you isn't a legitimate way to go about things. The principal of the balance of probabilities is an accepted one, and has been for a long time, both in terms of the FA's disciplinary process, and legally. To complain about it now is just clutching at straws IMO, as if you had an issue with the process, why was it not raised

I addressed this in an earlier post, this incident is my first exposure to Fa proceedings. I am not going to apologise for that, nor accept it as a valid reason not to find fault in them.

J. Marston · 01-01-2012 07:37PM

SantryRed wrote: »

Sick of people seeing one thing and not the other on this thread.

That link that opr put up is ABSOLUTE bollocks. Here at 2:50 you clearly see Suarez kick Evra, so go again manual_man

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZUNGsevm84o

Sure, what's the point in believing that? All that shows is two replays from clear cameras, one in super slo-mo. A dodgy camera phone from the crowd showing the incident from one shíte angle is far more reliable than Sky's replays.

Helix · 01-01-2012 07:37PM

spockety wrote: »

I addressed this in an earlier post, this incident is my first exposure to Fa proceedings. I am not going to apologise for that, nor accept it as a valid reason not to find fault in them.

it may be your first exposure to it, but it's certainly not liverpools

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

Comments