redmann

Evra's previous record could come into play if the 'interest of justice' card is played. The judgement relied upon Evra's credibility as a witness as the main reason for finding against Suarez. I agree that our legal team were incompetent. What are your thoughts re the Evra transcript, could that be a possible appeal on procedural grounds. Given that virtually no time was given to analyse the written transcript.

I have attempted to do an analysis of the possible course of action and any grounds of appeal. The findings of the FA are riddled with inconsistencies. a proper hatchet job has been done, considering Luis face a possible further ban for any repetition, it is imperative that his name and the good name of LFC is cleared. In accordance with the rules LS is only able to appeal against the severity of the sentence issued against him, with the hope of attempting a reduction. An appeal also leads to the possibility of an increase in the ban if it is found to be without merit and frivolous. LS is unable to appeal against the findings of the FA COM. For LS / LFC to succeed in an appeal against the findings then an appeal to the FA in accordance with FA RULE K: ARBITRATION must be made. This rule states: Rule K1(a) shall not operate to provide an appeal against the decision of a Regulatory Commission or an Appeal Board under the Rules and shall operate only as the forum and procedure for a challenge to the validity of such decision under English law on the grounds of ultra vires (including error of law), irrationality or procedural unfairness, with the Tribunal exercising a supervisory jurisdiction. This is a civil case and therefore test applied by FA COM was balance of probability. FA COM has accepted that the more serious the nature the case then the greater the burden of evidence required. FA COM (PARA 80) accepts that this case is very serious therefore there is a greater burden of evidence needed to find against LS. Video, audio and oral evidence was used aswell as written testimonies of witnesses. FA COM found LS to have used insulting language with reference to PE skin colour on seven occasions. No audio evidence demonstrated that LS was at fault. If there was any then FA COM would have detailed it in their determination. FA COM has stated that no witnesses heard any of the alleged insults. FA COM has stated that no video evidence shows him saying any of the alleged insults. FA COM found LS credibility to be in question and has found PE to be more credible witness. They also found that players motions on video evidence supports PE claims on Balance of Probabilities. This to the FA COM satisfies the ‘greater burden of evidence’ test for finding against LS. In order for any appeal to be successful LS / LFC have to demonstrate that the FA COM decision was irrational or an error of law has occurred. In order to succeed therefore LS / LFC have to show that the FA COM was irrational in finding PE evidence to be CREDIBLE, that PE’s evidence is littered with inconsistencies. PE’S CREDIBILITY: 1. COIN TOSS INCIDENT In PARA 329 PE asserts that the ref has wrongly called the toss of the coin “Mr Evra knew that he had won it”. This assertion is advanced by him calling Ryan Giggs over, remonstrating that an incorrect toss had been called. No determination was made by FA COM about this or any reference to his credibility about this incident. If ref is telling truth then PE is either lying, calling into question his credibility and has made an implied accusation that the REF has cheated, his behaviour is improper in accordance with rule E3. If the FA COM accepts that PE has told the truth then the REF has clearly cheated and action against the ref must be taken. It is irrational for the FA COM not to make a determination about this or PE’s credibility. This is critical as PE’s credibility is called into question prior to the game kicking off and the occurrence of the alleged incident. PE also states “when such a coin was used, he always called yellow given that the alternative, blue, is a Manchester City colour”(para 329) Once again PE has made an incorrect assertion, given that Manchester United regularly play in blue, and did indeed on the match in question. Not to mention that the colour blue is the colour of PE national team, France. The FA COM erred in making no finding as to this inconsistency in PE’s evidence. 2. PE’S USE OF THE WORD N****R PE states in PARA 130 that “he told the referee that Mr Suarez had called him a nigger”. This is later substantiated when PE comes with AF to the REF after the game and is included in the refs report. The words written in the report are N****r and are not refuted by PE. PE, evident by his team-mates testimonies reiterates that this was the word used by LS. The FA COM are irrational in finding that “nothing turns on the fact that Mr Evra may have thought that the word "negro" as used by Mr Suarez in the match translated as "nigger".” PE’s thoughts on the use of the word are the nucleus to the credibility of his testimony. The FA COM has stated that PE is fluent in Spanish; also they have stated that it was he who instigated the conversation in Spanish with LS. The FA COM have relied upon PE detailed testimony as to what he later said in Spanish and to what LS replied to him; again in Spanish. In fact the whole conversation took place in Spanish. It is irrational for the FA COM to find that PE was not aware of the meaning or use of the word ‘negro’ and to find PE use of an Italian definition in a Spanish conversation as credible. The FA COM have erred in accepting PE claim especially given the abhorrence to the word n****r and its pejorative use in British Society and culture. If PE is mistaken in his use of the meaning and understanding of Spanish words, then his credibility with regards to his testimony is also crucial. The accuracy and his understanding of what he said and what was said to him was incorrectly addressed by the FA COM. The FA COM is irrational in finding PE testimony to be credible given the above rational conclusion. 3. CANAL + INTERVIEW The FA COM is irrational in finding PE phrase ten times as a figure of speech and not to be taken literally, in relation to his interview on French TV. In making this finding they have accepted PE and DC opinion as to the meaning of the phrase. As with the Hernandez incident where part of his testimony was discounted on the grounds that he is not an expert, then the FA COM should have applied the same criteria in assessing the meaning of the phrase ten times and accepting DC’s opinion. The whole charge is dependent on the meaning of words that were said. Nevertheless PE has stated that he always gives interviews to French TV and that he did not wish to discuss racial slurs he faced having earlier informed the interviewer off recorrd as to his anger. The FA COM were irrational in not attributing sufficient weight to PE ‘ten times’ claim in this interview, especially as Libel laws come in to play, to dismiss the use of the phrase ‘ten times’ as not being literal is irrational, especially given PE claim that he did not wish to discuss this, the question remains why did he then do so on record? 4. PE’S BEHAVIOUR PE’s own evidence states that he has used threatening behaviour against LS. PARA 92: "Say it to me again, I'm going to punch you". PARA 94: "Okay, now I think I'm going to punch you". This is in breach of rule E3 relating to general behaviour which states: “A Participant shall at all times act in the best interests of the game and shall not act in any manner which is improper or brings the game into disrepute or use any one, or a combination of, violent conduct, serious foul play, threatening, abusive, indecent or insulting words or behaviour.” The FA COM has failed to make a finding or take action against PE, in doing so have failed to uphold the FA’s own rules. 5. NO SUPPORTING TESTIMONY The finding of the alleged ‘five times use of negro’ by the FA COM is irrational. The incident is alleged to have occurred in the goal mouth during a corner to be taken. On the balance of probabilities there is a greater chance for any alleged use of the word ‘negro’ to have been heard by PE team mates. The finding of the FA COM that De Gea would not have heard anything as he was concentrating on the match is irrational. As a goalkeeper his senses would be alert to visual and audio stimuli, especially calls of ‘keeper’. 6. PE’S HISTORY IN RACIAL ALLEGATIONS Given the serious nature of the charge against LS and that the corroborating evidence was inconclusive and therefore the FA COM were in the main reliant upon PE credibility as their main burden of evidence; the FA COM, in the interests of justice should have considered previous FA COM findings on PE behaviour and credibility in previous racial allegations with reference to the Chelsea FC grounds man. PE experience of previous FA COM hearings would account for his calmness and demeanour in front of this FA COM. FA COM erred in not addressing this when relying upon PE demeanour and conduct in this hearing.

Really like the look of Irwin, another Stevie Nicol perhaps? I definitely think he should be ahead of Mendy in the reserves, who plainly is not going to make it.

BBC channels are all free to view, therefore you do not need a sky subcription. BBC 3 where the milan game is on starts at 7:00pm on channel 115 for the UK. You should be able to watch the match without any need for acessing additional channels. You can also access channel 5 via the method that chris has stated. For channel frequencies search the web for Lyngsat website.