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

Fuhrer wrote: »

Oh really, ive never seen any posts referring to me as the nut retard.

You have a secret forum where you discuss your opinions on posters or you just PM them around to a select few of forum elders?

Crazy Horse 6 wrote: »

Jesus you would swear Suarez was involved in the killing of a black man instead of actually saying black man.

mixednuts wrote: »

Suarez apology en route .................















*watch this space .

monkey9 wrote: »

http://twitpic.com/837vxs

http://twitpic.com/837tuv/full


Luis Suarez: "I admitted I said a word in Spanish once & only once. I told the panel I would not use it again on a f'ball pitch in England."

"I never, ever used this word in a derogatory way and if it offends anyone I want to apologise"

ilovelamp2000 wrote: »

He apolgised "if" Evra was offended.

mike65 wrote: »

The FA say do as we say not as we do -

http://www.mirror.co.uk/news/top-stories/2012/01/04/fa-chief-exec-in-email-race-row-still-working-for-governing-body-115875-23677761/#ixzz1iX2feOr0

hadepsx wrote: »

this whole thing has to be the biggest witchhunt of recent times. suarez shafted since the ball began to roll on this one.

Why Liverpool have stopped fighting the Suarez verdict but not the way it was reached

By David Maddock in Mirror Football Blog

Published 23:00 04/01/12


It is the most controversial case ever to come before the FA, and certainly one with more mud-slinging than any in modern football history.

But on Wednesday, after months of accusation and counter-accusation, of claims of conspiracy and contempt, Liverpool finally offered a hint of a conciliatory tone amid the outrage of the racism row that has reverberated around the world.

In offering a public apology, Luis Suarez has at least acknowledged his words - or word , as he maintains - could have caused offence, even if he insisted he "never, ever" intended anything derogatory.

The striker has accepted his eight-match ban, and will sit out the next month with the intention of rebuilding a reputation that has been severely damaged by the case brought against him by the Football Association.

Liverpool, too, will quietly begin the process of restoring an image they realise has been tarnished by an affair which has so seriously polarised football.

Senior officials at the club accept mistakes were made - and certainly the whole case, from the very beginning, could have been handled differently.

But they also maintain that the issue of racism and the accusations against Suarez were so gravely serious - and the potential for widespread condemnation so dangerous - they were faced with little alternative but to defend their player with such vehemence.

That point forms the heart of the case they will make to the FA as they move forward this week, and begin the healing process that is so clearly required following one of the most unsavoury recent chapters in football's chequered history.

While Liverpool now accept Suarez was guilty - in the sense of using the word negro towards Patrice Evra, and also accept its use could be considered derogatory, even if it was never meant to be - they believe there should be serious changes in the way such important cases are heard.

They will approach the FA for talks in the coming days and push for a full inquiry into the disciplinary process, which currently calls for only a "probability" of guilt, even for cases as serious as accusations of racism.

In the UK, using inflammatory racist language is a serious criminal offence which can carry a prison sentence.

Liverpool argue Suarez has now essentially been condemned for such an offence by many people, without a proper trial.

They will ask the FA to consider a more vigorous procedure which demands more concrete evidence than what they claim is merely a balance of probability in judging one man's word against another.

The club will also question the use of a disciplinary committee that is selected by - and beholden to - the FA, when the governing body may be subject to the political agenda of the time.

Reds manager Kenny Dalglish raised the idea, on Tuesday evening, that Suarez was a man in the "wrong place at the wrong time", because the FA had a political agenda which was set in motion by their stance against Sepp Blatter's outrageous comments on the issue of racism.

While that seems a fanciful idea, Liverpool will argue that, in matters of such a serious nature, there should be a very different disciplinary procedure.

Yesterday, they argued not against the verdict, but against the process which arrived at that verdict.

Dalglish had spoken of evidence that was ignored or dismissed by the disciplinary committee, which, he says, proves his player's innocence.

Liverpool have shed some further light on that evidence, pointing to the fact that Evra's evidence did not appear to be subjected to the same level of scrutiny as that of Suarez.

In particular, they argue their own player was asked for his own version of events without having recourse to a video of the two-minute period where the two players had an angry exchange.

Evra though, was allowed access to the video, and was, Liverpool claim, "coached" through the incident.

Suarez's testimony was changed after he was allowed to see the video, but his club argue that is only natural, as no one has total recall, and video evidence can have a powerful prompting effect.

There is also a suggestion on the Liverpool side that Evra's testimony changed frequently - most notably when his claim he was racially abused "at least 10 times", was changed to five times.

Liverpool maintain this was one of the most inconsistent aspects of the whole case - of fundamental importance to the credibility and accuracy of the accusation - and yet it has been barely given weight by the commission.

They also feel the fact Evra admitted provoking Suarez with abusive language of his own should have led to disciplinary procedures, but was again ignored, as was the issue of why their player pinching the Frenchman was given so much importance by the committee, when Evra himself didn't even recall the incident.

Liverpool accept their case could certainly have been handled better, and there are those within the club who believe they were naive to admit anything when the issue was first raised in the referee's office immediately after the game.

One senior figure suggested they had been "too honest", in cooperating so openly. Next time, he said, there would be no such cooperation.

The club will also consider asking the FA if they will back a move to take the case to the Court of Arbitration in Sport to gain a definitive verdict.

Officials at Anfield though, essentially want to move on, and they hope the belatedly apology can be the first step towards restoring the tarnished image of player and club.

Despite the feeling of support towards their player, there is an acceptance Suarez should not have used the word, and, in that sense, is guilty of the charge, if not of the wider accusations of racism that followed.