Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[chrisbrand]

Isn't it great how Gordon Taylor manages to stick the knife in too?

 

This is the man who usually thinks professional footballers can do no wrong.

 

And he's more than willing to come up with a variety of excuses no matter what they do. He didn't mean to miss the drug test. It was a geniune mistake, etc, etc.

 

But he's sure the FA must have "conclusive" evidence.

 

Yes, that's why it's taken so long for them to sort it out.

[magicrat]

Been too angry to comment rationally since the news broke. I didn't think this would get to the stage it has but it was pretty obvious last week it wasn't going to turn out well for us. This whole farce does nothing to stamp out racism, it just plays politics with a very serious issue and demeans the genuine efforts of those who are trying to tackle the problem. Whether this goes to appeal or not I think the FA will come to regret parading Suarez's head on a spike to show Blatter. What do they now do about Captain Mongo ? They are going to get ripped to shreds over their double standards when the media feeding frenzy subsides and some serious consideration is given to the way they have behaved with their pathetic kangaroo court.

[ChrisM]

So Mackie got 3 games with 5 suspended, after admitting the charge.

 

Suarez got the full 8 after contesting it.

 

That's the FA's get out right there.

 

I'm beginning to think the rumour that they decided he was guilty on Friday and spent the next 4 days making it as legally watertight as possible aren't far off the mark.

[Trumo]

Clangers, do you hear them rolling about up there when you're thinking?

 

Nobody is suggesting that Suarez getting involved in a dose of verbals wasn't ill-advised. Quite a few on here have said he needs to learn to shut his yap as it could get him into trouble. And that's what has happened. On those grounds, of course he has to bear some responsibility for his actions. Nobody has suggested otherwise. However, the manner in which the investigation has been conducted can at best be described as dubious.

 

- The FA put together a 3-man 'independent' panel which included somebody who was once regularly in their employ, plus another known to have close ties with Ferguson, whom let it be said had a hands-on role in filing the complaint to the referee in the first place. The impartiality of those people must be questioned regardless of whether they gave the case due diligence.

 

- The massive differences in the way in which both the accused and accuser were questioned, what evidence was taken from each.

 

- The manner in which snippets have been leaked to the media, suggesting somebody close to the case has been leaking details which suggested that what has transpired was going to be the outcome all along.

 

- The fact (and it is a fact as past occurrences have shown) that the FA want to be seen to be dealing with a sensitive issue, rather than actually dealing with it properly. They've shown time and time again that all in the garden is rosy once they've had their pound of flesh. How come you never see the FA dealing with an issue more than once, in a game which has so much coverage and where so much happens in the heat of the moment? Remember the 'Respect The Ref' campaign?

 

- This issue of foul and abusive language. Wayne Rooney routinely mouths off during games, often directly at the officials in an aggressive and confrontational manner, yet the only time he's been done for it is when he swore at a TV camera after scoring a goal. The FA had to deal with that one because it was so obvious, yet there have been numerous instances where nothing has been done (I would include Craig Bellamy in that because he's another who runs his mouth too much), partly because of my next point.

 

- The referee's report. How often do we see the FA say they consider a particular matter to have been dealt with because the referee included it in his report? That the referee had dealt with the issue there and then, hence there was nothing further to be done? How does that stop a similar situation from occurring again? I believe it actually allows matters to escalate to a point where they end up going through legal channels, wasting both time and money.

 

---

 

I've written the above during my lunch hour so there might well be holes in it because it's very much off-the-cuff. However, it does lead me to another question that may or may not have been asked already.

 

But before that, let me just say this. Football is the most popular sport in this country, and footballers are - rightly or wrongly - idolised by millions, especially youngsters. That in itself carries a weight of responsibility much greater than you or I have to deal with, because we aren't in the public eye. What they do or say has consequences that they have to learn to live with. Football can be used as an educational tool for the wider society too. In this Evra-Suarez case, much has been made about the fact a certain word was used 'more than 10 times', and yet it is still subject to speculation as to what that word might be. In the process we've learned about the context of words like 'negrito' in different cultures, so that in itself has been useful in promoting greater understanding.

 

In light of the above, my question is: even though a disciplinary case was being heard, why could it not be made public as to what the alleged word was? Any discussion thereafter would result in people learning the meaning of the word in various contexts, including cultural differences. It would help better educate people on what is racially acceptable, and if it was deemed offensive enough, that would creep into the collective conscienceness in much the same way as words like 'nigger' have - as an unacceptable and derogatory term. The majority of people know that words like 'nigger' are not acceptable. Sure, some people will pick up on it solely for the purpose of being offensive (there are plenty of dickheads about), but the greater effect is in educating the public as to what is and isn't acceptable nowadays.

 

Right, back to lunch. My double bread with meat is getting cold.

[betterman]

Go back to redcafe you boring twat.

 

Schools of today i take it.

[usernameunknown]

Schools of today i take it.

 

Judging by your spelling I guess it is!

[H7K]

Absolutely gutted, How is it that they announce that they have found Luis guilty of racially abusing evra, Ban him for 8 games plus a £40,000 pending appeal but not release the evidence??

[betterman]

Judging by your spelling I guess it is!

 

My humour is wasted on you my good man.

[BringbackBiscan]

So Mackie got 3 games with 5 suspended, after admitting the charge.

 

Suarez got the full 8 after contesting it.

 

That's the FA's get out right there.

 

I'm beginning to think the rumour that they decided he was guilty on Friday and spent the next 4 days making it as legally watertight as possible aren't far off the mark.

 

There's actually not much wrong with that though. If anything it goes against Luis cause the 8 game precedent is there.

 

In most walks of life, you'll get a less severe punishment if you admit your guilt and take your punishment.

 

I'm not saying Luis should have done so, far from it. Just that it's always the case that fighting your corner the whole way and being found guilty will result in a harsher punishment.

[torahboy]

The press response, well the fucking Mirror actually, has been demented. The Man cunts are gleefully jumping all over this FA verdict and using it as a stick to beat Suarez, Dalglish and the club. Maddock must have been burned by Dalglish on more than one occasion as his smug, self-righteous and idiotic article smacked more of schadenfreude than objective analysis. We should just smack this twat whenever we spot him around Anfield or Melwood.

 

Another ludicrous contribution to this parade of piss poor pundits came from Professor Luther Blissett on Sky. He dismissed the 'cultural differences' defence as rubbish, insisting that such distinctions no longer have any credibility, So, by employing Professor Luther's reasoning, it would be acceptable to make Muslim women remove their face veils, force Sikhs to wear safety helmets on building sites and when motorcycling, bang up Rastafarians for possession of marijuana and ban marches by the Orange Lodge. Actually, the last one might have some merit. But it's this sort of inverted racism that damages the credibility of the FA fight to 'rid the game of all racism'.

 

Fuck it, anyway. We know Suarez is not a racist but we also have no doubts that Evra and the FA are cunts.

[BringbackBiscan]

Big brave JT going to court.

[d.k.E.]

John Terry to face criminal charges over alleged racist abuse | Football | guardian.co.uk Edited December 21, 2011 by d.k.E.

[Whelan]

There's actually not much wrong with that though. If anything it goes against Luis cause the 8 game precedent is there.

 

In most walks of life, you'll get a less severe punishment if you admit your guilt and take your punishment.

 

I'm not saying Luis should have done so, far from it. Just that it's always the case that fighting your corner the whole way and being found guilty will result in a harsher punishment.

 

Luis admitted he had said it. He just didn't admit it was racially motivated, Makie did racially insult somebody, knowingly and without any cultural barriers.

 

This has been done to criticise Sepp Blatter.

[betterman]

The Independent Regulatory Commission will provide written reasons for its decision in due course setting out:

 

(a) the findings of fact made by it;

 

(b) the reasons for its decision finding the charge proved; and

 

© the reasons for the penalty.

 

Until we see this we dont have much to go on.

[BringbackBiscan]

Luis admitted he had said it. He just didn't admit it was racially motivated, Makie did racially insult somebody, knowingly and without any cultural barriers.

 

This has been done to criticise Sepp Blatter.

 

Yip, most certainly has.

 

I'm just saying that Makie getting a lesser punishment when he accepted his guilt and took his punishment means nothing. It's always the case, even in a court of law.

[Evil_Ways]

The Independent Regulatory Commission will provide written reasons for its decision in due course setting out:

 

(a) the findings of fact made by it;

 

(b) the reasons for its decision finding the charge proved; and

 

© the reasons for the penalty.

 

Until we see this we dont have much to go on.

 

We have the clubs statement to go on, i find it hard to believe they would say: "Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him"

 

If they didnt think the FA's verdict is a fucking disgrace.

[betterman]

[Russ Atmosphere]

There's actually not much wrong with that though. If anything it goes against Luis cause the 8 game precedent is there.

 

In most walks of life, you'll get a less severe punishment if you admit your guilt and take your punishment.

 

I'm not saying Luis should have done so, far from it. Just that it's always the case that fighting your corner the whole way and being found guilty will result in a harsher punishment.

 

I can see the point you're trying to make but it's wrong. Only a 3 game precedent exists, you can't go including the 5 game suspended ban just because a player wanted to dispute his charge. That suspended ban is intended for a repeat conviction.

[betterman]

We have the clubs statement to go on, i find it hard to believe they would say: "Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him"

 

If they didnt think the FA's verdict is a fucking disgrace.

 

It will still be interesting to see exactly how they make the 8 game ban seem fair in their eyes.

[Guest San Don]

The Independent Regulatory Commission will provide written reasons for its decision in due course setting out:

 

(a) the findings of fact made by it;

 

(b) the reasons for its decision finding the charge proved; and

 

© the reasons for the penalty.

 

Until we see this we dont have much to go on.

 

Doesnt seem to have stopped

 

luther blisset, gordon taylor, clarke carlisle, ,dave maddock, emily nugent's son, lipton, SSN, kick it out, racism out of football in europe etc, etc though, does it?

[goatboy59]

The FA runs the national team, they've made several (justifiably) vociferous complaints about the likes of Bulgaria, Croatia, Spain etc and even louder whinges about the shite punishments meted out for abuse of Glen, Emile, Rio etc.

 

Then when two incidents have occured in our league, they feared the rest of the continent shouting "well, big bollocks - what have you got to say now eh?" and have reacted in fear to that.

 

It was never a fair trial from the off and if we fight it strongly and another body reduces the punishment, the FA says "out of our hands, we did our bit".

 

The United thing also made them shit their kecks.

[xerxes]

We have the clubs statement to go on, i find it hard to believe they would say: "Nothing we have heard in the course of the hearing has changed our view that Luis Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him"

 

A statment which might come back to haunt Ayres and the legal team. JW will be asking why, if Suarez is innocent of the charges brought against him, he was found guilty, and how good a job our side did in putting our case?

[betterman]

Urban Dictionary

 

1. negrito

endearing term meaning sweetheart especially in writing

2. Negrito

A black person eating a cheeto.

 

3. negrito

Over excessively used word by MAS to insult others over mIRC. Thinks that by saying this his e-penis will grow anywhere from 3 to 5 inches in length

 

4. negrito

Ni**er in spanish

 

So he was actually just telling Evra he loved him.

[Jack the Sipper]

I keep on reading, here and elsewhere, that Saurez has admitted to saying this or that (but in a non-racist context), but so far, no actual evidence. We know, from his own statement before he was charged, that he admitted to saying something but since then it's all been speculation dressed up as facts. It wasn't so long ago that it was agreed among many people, fans and journos, that he admitted to saying 'negrito', despite there being no evidence of this. Now, people, including, I notice, the Echo, are claiming with the same assurance that he called Evra a 'negro'.

 

Forgive me for waiting for the actual findings to be released.

[fowler9]

its all bollocks and Luis was just expressing how he feels we should sign Negredo