Quantcast
Evra accuses Suarez of racism - Page 105 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content
NickConklin

Evra accuses Suarez of racism

Recommended Posts

Liverpool FC: James’ Pearce’s verdict on the Luis Suarez ban

by James Pearce, Liverpool EchoDec 21 2011

 

 

A FEELING of disbelief and anger hangs over Anfield today. Over the past two months Liverpool FC have stood firmly behind Luis Suarez confident that the serious allegations of racist abuse made by Patrice Evra would be thrown out.

 

Yet the club’s worst nightmare came true last night. The Football Association handed out an eight-game ban, coupled with a £40,000 fine, after the independent regulatory commission found him guilty of ‘used insulting words’ towards Evra including a ‘reference to his colour’.

 

An appeal is certain with Liverpool FC’s hard-hitting statement laying bare their fury at not only the outcome but also the way in which this investigation was conducted.

 

The fact is this was a case of one player’s word against another’s. Remarkably, the three-man panel decided that Evra was the more reliable witness.

 

This was the same player who was involved in high profile allegations of racism three years ago following a bust-up with Chelsea groundsman Sam Bethell at Stamford Bridge.

 

An FA hearing described Evra’s account of events that day as “exaggerated and unreliable” and the charge of racism was thrown out.

 

After the 1-1 draw at Anfield back on October 15 Evra accused Suarez of racially abusing him “more than 10 times” yet no-one inside a crowded penalty area at the Kop End or in the crowd heard anything.

 

Not one of Evra’s team-mates came forward to back up his serious allegations, including goalkeeper David De Gea, who speaks Spanish.

 

Suarez, for his part, admitted to saying ‘why, negro?’ to Evra on one occasion after Evra said ‘Don’t touch me, you South American’.

 

The word ‘negro’ is Spanish for black and in his native South America it is not deemed to be offensive. Someone with black hair is often called that without any malice intended.

 

Brighton boss and fellow Uruguayan Gus Poyet recently explained: “In Uruguay it is a nickname for someone whose skin is darker than the rest. It is not offensive. Such people are part of society.

 

“We will defend them, go to war with them, share everything with them and at the same time use that word.”

 

 

 

Read More Liverpool FC: James’ Pearce’s verdict on the Luis Suarez ban - Liverpool FC News - Liverpool FC - Liverpool Echo

 

I have probably missed it but that is the first time I have seen it claimed that Suarez has admitted to using that word. Before now the press have suggested it was "negrito" and from Suarez himself the only thing I have seen is "I called him something his teammates call him".

 

It will be interesting to see the written notes.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looks like Luis is getting a lot of support which is great, I just hope he realises that many people with even half a brain know he's not racist. The FA are bunch of clueless, biased fucking scum as well. If it'd been a Manc there'd have no fucking way been an EIGHT game ban. It would've been half that at the most.

 

Which isn't even the point, he should be cleared of this and I hope this badly damages the reputation of the FA, who are a bunch of fucking idiots.

 

And total credit to whoever wrote the brilliant statement from the club. It seemed to read perfectly from start to finish.

 

According to my dad, who listens to TalkShite a lot (sorry for that, he is old), Brazil was horrified at the severity of any ban and also Keys as well. Surprising but hopeful as well that not the whole media has swallowed the FA's moral bullshit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I won't be able to keep a straight face when opposition crowd hooligans chant "RACIST" at Suarez.

 

Many of them probably won't even believe he is anyway, but will just do it to try and unsettle him.

 

According to my dad, who listens to TalkShite a lot (sorry for that, he is old), Brazil was horrified at the severity of any ban and also Keys as well. Surprising but hopeful as well that not the whole media has swallowed the FA's moral bullshit.

 

Sorry didn't have a clue who Brazil was, I thought you meant the country! Was going to say that a lot of people in Uruguay (and hopefully other countries around the world) are bemused at this too, which is good because it shows the FA up for what they are. I bet Keys is secretly happy though.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Suarez has let down himself, his club, his manager and his sport by Liverpool correspondent David Maddock

 

Kenny-Dalglish+graphic

 

Luis Suarez's guilt over racism charges has devastating implications far beyond even the impact on Liverpool's season.

 

The first thing manager Kenny Dalglish must do on Wednesday morning is revise his plans for the January transfer window - so that they include the search for a proven goalscorer.

 

And if that isn't a big enough headache, the Anfield legend must then sit down and consider if he was right to invest his trust - and massive, hard-earned reputation - so implicitly in the Uruguayan.

 

For a club of such standing, of such dignified history, to have their star player condemned for such a serious offence by the FA after they had defended him so vehemently strikes at the heart of their very credibility.

 

 

Dalglish has, from the very beginning, insisted he wanted justice to be done in any inquiry, no matter what the outcome, no matter who was found guilty - and no matter that his own reputation was at stake.

 

Speaking on October 28, he declared: "Whoever is the guilty party - the person who said it or the accuser - [should] get their due punishment."

 

Liverpool followed up that statement by urging the FA to punish Patrice Evra, should his claims of being the victim of "more than 10" racist comments by Suarez prove false.

 

But now, with Suarez judged a racist, there must be some serious soul-searching at a club that prides itself on its unique community spirit, and its all-inclusive charter.

 

After such a hard-line stance, they must back up their words with some tough action.

 

It is not just Dalglish who has been let down.

 

The club's owners, who have a passionate record of fighting racism in their native United States, submitted testimony to the FA disciplinary hearing in support of their player.

 

Both John Henry and Tom Werner, the principal owners, have put a huge amount of money and effort into anti-racist initiatives at their baseball team the Boston Red Sox, and recently described their efforts by saying:

 

"We have to make a statement not just in baseball but in our community that diversity is an issue that hasn't been fully addressed in the past and certainly has to be fully addressed.

 

"I think it's important what your actions are. That will really define the franchise going forward."

 

But now the situation at Liverpool will demand similar efforts - given that one of their most bankable assets has been tainted by an FA conviction over such a serious charge - to define the Anfield franchise in a very different way to that imagined.

 

Questions must also be asked as to why the club was so swift to accept their player's explanation of events on that fateful October afternoon when Evra first made his allegations.

 

There was no internal enquiry into the incident, and Dalglish will feel betrayed, as his own reputation is hauled over the coals, along with that of his club, because he had every right to expect the player to give him the full facts. He also had every right to expect more of Suarez.

 

Liverpool must swiftly draw a line under the whole sorry affair.

 

They can do that by reiterating their consistent stance against racism in football - and showing they mean it through positive action.

 

During the FA's inquiry, there was talk of conspiracy, of the English's governing body's desire to score points off Sepp Blatter, and even grumbles about the integrity of the independent committee who examined the case.

 

But Liverpool had the chance to veto any disciplinary committee member they felt was not suitable - and declined.

 

On Wednesday morning, there should not be talk of injustice, but of how racism is an evil in sport and in society that must be exorcised once and for all.

 

Only after that can the manager turn his mind to finding a suitable replacement for Suarez during his time on the sidelines for much of January and February.

 

He will be missing when the transfer window opens, and when so much is at stake during such a crucial period of the season, and the necessary solution will be to find someone who can solve the Reds' obvious goal-scoring problem.

 

Even with the audacious talent of the South American in the side, they have struggled to translate territorial dominance into goals. Without their top scorer, the season could implode.

 

It will not be easy to sign a proven scorer next month because clubs trade in the currency of goals and are loathe to lose the men who can provide them.

 

But it is a must.

 

The owners need to act, as they did at this time last year when the devastating blow of the sale of Fernando Torres was almost wiped from the collective memory of Liverpool's worried fans by the dramatic, bold, big-money capture of Andy Carroll.

 

Decisive action is required from the owners and from Dalglish, on Wednesday morning, to save Liverpool's reputation - and perhaps to save their season.

 

 

This from a supposed red who has done podcast work for this website. Gobshite. Do you why the club are backing him Dave? Because they believe he is innocent, that's why. Betrayal? Fuck off you tit.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is probably gonna be like the Beckham witch hunt after 98, where the press went way to far and he was booed like crazy wherever he went, for a while.

 

BTW did that fucking Mirror headline go to print looking like that ?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

"He deserves the ban anyway for the way he cheeted Ghana out of the World Cup"

 

This is the kind of shite floating around the internet now. You imagine if, let's say, Big Brave England Captain JT™, Lamps, or Wazza handballed a goal bound effort which eventually saw England through to the next round of a World Cup. They'd be naming fucking schools and airports after them in this country.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
This from a supposed red who has done podcast work for this website. Gobshite. Do you why the club are backing him Dave? Because they believe he is innocent, that's why. Betrayal? Fuck off you tit.

 

Can only imagine what Kenny will say after he see that headline, i think he's gonna tell him exactly who he feels betrayed by and it's not Luis Suarez.

 

Fucking journalist scum.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Unrighteous, you missed the 2nd page from the Echo.

 

Strangely, those linguistic and cultural differences appear to have carried little weight with the commission.

 

As did the fact that Suarez took time out during the 2010 World Cup in South Africa to attend charitable projects in the townships promoting inclusion for everyone in sport.

 

As did the fact that prior to his move to Anfield in January this year he was captain of a multi-racial Ajax team.

 

As did the fact that Suarez comes from a mixed race family background himself as his grandfather is black.

 

There are fears that the FA have wanted to make an example of Suarez. That they had to be seen to be strong on racism following the governing body’s long-running feud with Fifa president Sepp Blatter, who was recently pilloried for suggesting someone who is racially abused during a game should simply shake hands with the perpetrator after the final whistle.

 

Paul Goulding QC, who chaired the independent commission, even accepted in his opening statement that Suarez wasn’t racist. So why come to the conclusion they did?

 

There is also anger at the way the investigation was conducted.

 

Suarez was interviewed on just one occasion. He was asked for his version of events and was never shown any video footage.

 

However, Evra was interviewed on more than one occasion and given video evidence to consider before he submitted his final statement. Why?

 

Why also has Evra not been charged despite admitting during the course of the investigation that he made foul mouthed comments to Suarez about a member of his family.

 

With Suarez also facing another FA charge for an alleged offensive gesture made to Fulham fans recently, there are real concerns that a witch hunt is being conducted against Liverpool FC.

 

For now Liverpool must wait until the commission’s written judgement arrives through the post over the coming days. From then they will have 14 days in which to lodge an appeal.

 

In the meantime Suarez, who described yesterday as ‘painful’, is available for Liverpool FC to face Wigan at the DW Stadium tonight – but whether he’s in the right frame of mind is another matter.

 

 

 

Read More Liverpool FC: James’ Pearce’s verdict on the Luis Suarez ban - Liverpool FC News - Liverpool FC - Liverpool Echo

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ramblings from the Far Out Son of Lung

(listening to the blue album probably doesn't help here)

 

Liverpool as a city and club has really big way to change the game and society here. Everybody for the last 10 weeks or so has been trying to justify how suarez may have spoken to evra in the goal mouth tussle. This has led to people querying their own beliefs as to what racism is, what discrimination is, how we are being done by the man (the F.A.).

Barneys not just with fans of other clubs (Abs), but also amongst our own fans (major tom), with people really unsure on what side to take in case of being called a racist for supporting our own player, who we now have personal bias behind to really look at the statements of what has gone on, hopefully it will provide a leap forward in our ability to progress.

The ninety eighteen win for the suffragettes was all about civil rights, the movement pertained to women in the Uk being treated as equals, to be offered the vote, essentialy what they wanted was to be looked on as an equal member of society, with the same rights as man.

The many civil rights acts of late fifties and early sixties America, were about giving black/coloured people of America equality with any other American man, of every man.

 

No more:

Blacks Only wash rooms

Blacks at the back of the bus

Blacks barred from institutions of higher education

Blacks slaughtered by lynching should the white man want

This is CIVIL RIGHTS, what people fought and died over.

 

What has occured between suarez and evra is not a case of civil rights, it is a matter of acrimonious dispute regarding 2 people in a physical battle. We need to analyse what has happened here:

 

Suarez has patted evra on the head and (at worst according to current reports) been told to "get off you south american" suarez has responded with alleged reference to Evra's skin colour.

 

Now at what point has Suarez discriminated against Evra??

 

We really need to look at what has been reported ( which is, in the worst case scenario) Suarez has been called a South American, and Evra has been called black….. Both these are things to be proud of??? In so much as we can all proudly call ourselves scousers/liverpool/footbal fans?? We are a collective identified by our love of football, there are many collectives out there some of us are members of some and not others. There will always be shit to separate us, if we allow it, and shit that won't, the key is working out which is which…

 

What is no-doubt unfolding in the UK, is that Liverpool FC and Luis Suarez is getting a fucking good kicking, for something that should be laughed out of court by any sentient being - for supporting a player against discriminatory action who is being accused of discrimination.

 

How many of you would employ an african dude?

 

 

 

 

How many of you would employ an african dude who supported man united?

 

 

 

 

How many of you would support an african dude, who supported man united, and had fucked yer sister?

 

 

 

 

 

 

 

Ah! see! Thats you! you've just discriminated against some poor white african dude, just because he supports man united and HE FUCKED YOUR SISTER!

 

Okay?? So we have a bit more of an idea of whats really at stake here?? This shit is important for everyone, there are people running roughshod over society - thats all of us black/white/jew/gentile/homo/hispanic/women/children/fatcunts, yer know if we really got ourselves down to the nitty gritty we might see, we are all being fucked over monumentally by people in power. whether that be the F.A., the libdems, Labour… either way we get fucked up because we allow power to differentiate between us…I have a dream…

blacks, whites, hispanics, asians, weird fuckers from the poles,fat bastards, skinny cunts, over eaters, feeders, under eaters, freaks and mugwump jism of all staring together and saying FUCK YOU, this shit is stupid

 

A change is gonna come, it has to come, and it will be when we all recognise each other as brother and sister, and sing the same song pete seeger has been singing for nearly a hundred years: WE SHALL OVERCOME

 

Go and listen to you lot by orbital, you now have the opportunity to be God, how do you work it out?

 

Hasta luego, negritos

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Can't believe he's written that, I hope Dave gives him some shit.

 

For someone supposedly so connected with the club and clued up, the article is absolutely disgraceful and total hatchet job. It is aimed solely at the knuckle draggers who pollute this country and who, starting in Wigan tonight, will give Luis living hell for this disgraceful smear. Fuck off Maddock, I can expect it from some cockney Daily Star cunt but you should know better. Bridges burnt.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

This is a mess. Like most Reds I am aghast at how this has unfolded.

 

FSG will be receiving digital copies of today’s back pages with alarm. Questions will be asked.

 

Unless something dramatic emerges from the detailed adjudication, this appears to hinge on semantic and cultural linguistic usage. The howls of protest from our support appear justified, so what has gone wrong? Have the FA made a mistake? Are they guilty of wilful bias (pro Manc/ anxious to show anti racist credentials to Blatter/UEFA)? Or have the club mishandled this?

 

FSG have no football experience. Only one Director, Ayres, is UK domicile, with no previous experience of high profile FA Tribunals. The last time Kenny managed us we had one of the most respected Football Administrators in the game, Peter Robinson, at the helm. Now, there is no-one with experience, contacts, and know-how.

 

The FA, in Paul Goulding, had one of the top QC’s in the country on this case : “He is ‘a leading silk at the very top of his game.’ His ‘extraordinary eye for detail, technical excellence and strategic mind’ make him ‘the number-one choice for complex, high-profile disputes in the employment field.’ He is renowned for being extremely hard-working and ‘just wants to win for his clients.’ One source adds: ‘He is like a machine. He piles through the work’.” Paul is also ranked in the Sports area and regarded as “one of the go-to practitioners for sports employment cases.” Who was in our team? What direction were they given? Has the club let Luis down?

 

I am deeply concerned , as FSG will be, that this has the potential to become even more damaging. In the world at large “loyalty, backing, support” for the player, may appear as backing racism. The game at OT is a nightmare with thousands of fan camera phones and dozens of TV cameras in place to pick out “support” for Suarez and abuse for the victim from our travelling support- with the sceptre of further charges.

 

So how has it come to this? If this hinges on semantics/linguistics, what attempts were made to head this off at the pass, before it escalated? Did the club and player offer an unreserved apology for an unintended offence? Was that rejected? Or were we asleep at the wheel?

 

At this stage our options are quite limited. As a club we have agreed to be bound by the rules of the tribunal. We can appeal, but are we appealing the decision, or the sentence? If it is the decision we will have to overturn in two weeks something which it has taken the FA two months to arrive at. If it is the sentence, then the odd game or two is neither here nor there.

 

Last but not least is why the Club have permitted the verdict, but not the adjudication, to be made public? Much of the current outrage is as a result of a bewilderment, that I share that a case that appeared pretty flimsy has been allowed to turn out like this.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Suarez, for his part, admitted to saying ‘why, negro?’ to Evra on one occasion after Evra said ‘Don’t touch me, you South American’.

________________________________________________________________________________________________________________

 

First time I'd read that exchange.

Suarez really did push the boundary there, cultural misunderstanding aside, that's borderline. Not saying that Evra was not JUST as guilty though, that's piss poor.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
It's not to anyone with half a brain though, because they use words like negrito in Uruguay without it being racist. If only we could do it all over the world and black people would call us honky/honkito or something, all of this stupid pointless fucking crap could be thrown out of the window. But no, it's got to be over the top, pointless pc bullshit. I hope we evolve past this one day as a human race, because it's a waste of time and energy.

 

And on top of everything else our season has a good chance of being fucked now.

 

Top post, mate.

Unfortunately, no one has anywhere near half a brain anymore.

The easy way out is to label someone a racist, sexist or other any other type of "-ist" regardless of context or circumstance.

Examining context or circumstance is far too much like hard work and requires one to acknowledge, examine and embrace difference.

Political correctness, on the other hand, is anthropological sloth.

 

And more to the point, yes, this does somewhat potentially fuck what was looking a tasty second half of our season.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't really understand this at all

 

Evra says he isn't a racist, the fa say he isn't a racist, but the ban is for using derogatory language referring to Evra's colour...which is racist isnt it?

 

It's a bit schizophrenic

 

And have they said what the words used were? Negritos

 

It s to stop Luis being able to go to the courts with a case for slander.

 

It makes it look like a total stich up on Luis to me,because it makes no sense for the cunt to report Luis to the ref after the game about racist remarks and then to comeout with his I dont think he is a racist on the statement.

 

It would not surprise me at all if the FA told him to put that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Can't help thinking this was a stitch up, and that we are in a terrible position. Any defence of Suarez will be perceived as the club condoning racism, because mud sticks, and the FA have engineered a political decision.

 

Suarez reputation and name have been destroyed beyond repair. What a fucking evil situation.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×