Evra accuses Suarez of racism

[TheDrowningMan]

Barclay has also said:

 

Argument over Suarez/Evra is clearly no longer over guilt and innocence but length of punishment

 

and

 

Re Suarez: if you were in Saudi and got arrested for swigging whisky in public, would you be able to get off citing "cultural differences"?

 

Love the Saudi one. He's inadvertently accused his beloved FA of running a horrendously draconian operation.

[GUS]

Barclay has also said:

 

Argument over Suarez/Evra is clearly no longer over guilt and innocence but length of punishment

 

 

If they have found Suarez guilty but are undecided over length of punishment why not say 'The verdict is guilty, sentence to follow'

[TheDrowningMan]

I think there's no question that if he's found guilty, banned and then exonerated in a criminal court we should either be given back any points we lose during his absence, be allowed to replay the matches after the season's end or compensated for the financial loss we've incurred - we finish six points outside the top four, the FA are found to have fucked up then they should pay up to the tune of a CL appearance.

 

I don't think any other outcome would be satisfactory, and football would lose a great deal of credibility otherwise.

[TheDrowningMan]

If they have found Suarez guilty but are undecided over length of punishment why not say 'The verdict is guilty, sentence to follow'

 

You have a point, though we are dealing with the FA. I don't think anyone would be especially surprised if it transpired that they were consulting with Ferguson and Evra to determine a fair punishment.

[Guest Numero Veinticinco]

 

Re Suarez: if you were in Saudi and got arrested for swigging whisky in public, would you be able to get off citing "cultural differences"?

 

There's certainly provisions in law in any sensible country for cultural differences, yes.

[FrenchEyeGlass]

Not that we know for sure about Negrito being the word used but..

 

Just speaking to the lady about it and she immediately (before I defended Suarez) said "The suffix 'ito' and 'ita' are affectionate terms. Well, I wouldn't say affectionate but leaning towards that."

 

I pushed her on it and basically she told me that it is the furthest thing from offensive and if anything it is the exact opposite. She cited words such as Mamasita and told me how people will use Pappito and Mammito (as opposed to Pappa and Mamma) in order to add more affection. Or, for instance how people use Gordita/Gordito as opposed to Gordo - the latter meaning "fat" and being offensive whilst the former two being highly affectionate.

 

She even told me about how people use the word Gringito (as opposed to Gringo) as a term of affection - which is pretty similar to Negrito, just concerning "foreign men".

 

With a case as complex as this, I really stuggle to see any of the absolute dickwads in the FA being able to fathom the intricacies. If you are going to label somebody racist, it has to go to court - I dont understand where the distinction is. The football field is still the real world and if Evra does not want to press charges then I find it bemusing how the FA can hand down their version of "justice".

 

If I was racially abused, a 6 match ban would not make me happy, nor would I feel it is justice. Why is Anton Ferdinand upset enough to involve the police (as would I or any other person who has been racially abused) whilst Evra is not?

 

Personally I believe it is because one case is genuine and the other highly fabricated.

[shanks69]

Barclay has also said:

 

Argument over Suarez/Evra is clearly no longer over guilt and innocence but length of punishment

 

and

 

Re Suarez: if you were in Saudi and got arrested for swigging whisky in public, would you be able to get off citing "cultural differences"?

i'd say anyone going to saudi would know swigging whisky in public would be against the law.

[xerxes]

You have a point, though we are dealing with the FA. I don't think anyone would be especially surprised if it transpired that they were consulting with Ferguson and Evra to determine a fair punishment.

 

That may be a very smart move if the allegation has substance, but with mitigating factors. If that were the case, it could provide for no formal penalty with an apology offered, and accepted.(In which case why did that not happen in the first place behind closed doors?).

[BCM]

 

With a case as complex as this, I really stuggle to see any of the absolute dickwads in the FA being able to fathom the intricacies. If you are going to label somebody racist, it has to go to court - I dont understand where the distinction is. The football field is still the real world and if Evra does not want to press charges then I find it bemusing how the FA can hand down their version of "justice".

 

If I was racially abused, a 6 match ban would not make me happy, nor would I feel it is justice. Why is Anton Ferdinand upset enough to involve the police (as would I or any other person who has been racially abused) whilst Evra is not?

 

Personally I believe it is because one case is genuine and the other highly fabricated.

 

Couldnt put it better myself

[xerxes]

With a case as complex as this, I really stuggle to see any of the absolute dickwads in the FA being able to fathom the intricacies. If you are going to label somebody racist, it has to go to court - I dont understand where the distinction is. The football field is still the real world and if Evra does not want to press charges then I find it bemusing how the FA can hand down their version of "justice".

 

If I was racially abused, a 6 match ban would not make me happy, nor would I feel it is justice. Why is Anton Ferdinand upset enough to involve the police (as would I or any other person who has been racially abused) whilst Evra is not?

 

Personally I believe it is because one case is genuine and the other highly fabricated.

 

Fair comment. But it is the FA’s lawyers that will determine this.

 

If there is no criminal case, I fail to see how the FA will make a lesser charge stick. If I were Suarez I would threaten a defamation suit in response.

 

If there is a case, but the FA duck it, they risk Evra going to the Police.

 

If there is case, and Suarez is found guilty, why would no criminal charges follow? Racist abuse is a criminal offence.

 

If, as seems possible, there are significant mitigating factors here, how matters such as these are dealt with requires review.

[Guest davelfc]

Fair comment. But it is the FA’s lawyers that will determine this.

 

If there is no criminal case, I fail to see how the FA will make a lesser charge stick. If I were Suarez I would threaten a defamation suit in response.

 

If there is a case, but the FA duck it, they risk Evra going to the Police.

 

If there is case, and Suarez is found guilty, why would no criminal charges follow? Racist abuse is a criminal offence.

 

If, as seems possible, there are significant mitigating factors here, how matters such as these are dealt with requires review.

 

It might have changed since my day but I seem to vaguely remember them needing evidence in a criminal court. It hasn't gone that way because it's a load of bollocks from a small french twat, now where have I heard that recently.

[Steve]

If there is case, and Suarez is found guilty, why would no criminal charges follow? Racist abuse is a criminal offence.

 

.

 

If Suarez is found guilty it would never get to a criminal court as he'd have no chance of a fair trial, on the basis that an FA panel has already found him guilty. When Evra made that first allegation that he was abused ten times, then that is sustained harassment and he should have been told to report it to police. Such a serious charge should be getting dealt with in the Crown Court by judge and jury not a hotel by three FA dickheads.

[Guest San Don]

Some of the speculation on this thread is pretty wild.

 

The context of all of this is that the FA have rightly been running a pretty vigorous, and successful. anti-racism campaign, which we all should support, in the face of indifference, to put it mildly from some other Euro FA’s making the English FA pretty unpopular at Association level abroad. English football led the justified charge recently against Sepp Blatter for his soft-pedalling on racism which has further alienated the FA from the upper echelons of UEFA. A very high profile race murder trial is currently being heard with a twenty year history stemming from initial indifference to racism. The media and European Football will be watching the Terry/Suarez cases accordingly. The FA cannot be seen to be soft on racism- nor should it be.

 

The details of the Suarez/Evra incident are not in the public domain. Everyone is guessing. If he is guilty he should be punished, if he is innocent there should be no penalty.

 

This case has more to it this than is immediately apparent. Racist abuse is a criminal offence. It appears that Evra has not complained to the Police. If Suarez is found guilty that might follow. The context in which a player might be found guilty of racist abuse by the FA, but where it falls short of criminal proceedings, is unclear.

 

How racist abuse on the field should be dealt with is unclear. Should victims report it to the referee, and how should he respond? What obligations do other players/ the team captain have? What happens when the abuse is heard only by the victim? Is there provision for the allegations to be dealt with firstly at Club level before the “nuclear “ option of a formal charge with criminal ramifications? If not, why not?

 

It appears that there may be a cultural/language dimension to this. If there is, the FA will be very wary about passing a guilty verdict which could then be followed by a criminal charge, which was then unproven. It is a lot easier for them to find Suarez not guilty, than guilty. The problem is that if that amounts to a “bottle job” ignoring evidence, and Evra decides to pursue a criminal complaint, and that is then successful, then the FA’s credibility is shot to pieces.

 

If this is about language differences, then the best answer is an agreement that it was a cultural/linguistic misunderstanding, apology offered and accepted – but that could have been done wide of a formal hearing/complaint.

 

This is actually a far trickier problem for the FA than it is for Suarez. Whatever they decide may come back to haunt them, that is almost certainly the reason for the delayed verdict.

 

Kinell. You must still be pulling splinters out of your arse sitting on that fence so much!

[ChrisM]

Anton Ferdinand didn't involve the police, it was a member of the public.

[Code]

There is no way that is true.

 

Why not, they should ban the racists in this case and since they cant ban themselves its only Evra left.

[njackets]

There seems to be a unconfirmed reports of Suarez has been cleared 100% and the reason no verdict till tuesday is because there working on what punishment for Evra.

 

This appears to be coming from scum fans to.

 

This would be the best Crimbo present i've had since I was a nipper, never in a million years though!

[Guest San Don]

I've no doubt Suarez will be found guilty over this.

 

Not because I think he is (after all wasnt united's defence of cantona that him being called a 'french twat' or whatever that led to his kung fooing a spectator, racist so by united's own logic, Evra is also guilty of racist language calling Suarez 'south american'?).

 

Suarez will be found guilty because of the way the charge is worded "It is alleged that Suarez used abusive and/or insulting words and/or behaviour towards Manchester United's Patrice Evra contrary to FA rules.

 

"It is further alleged that this included a reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra."

 

By that wording, Suarez only needed to have told evra to 'fuck off, you c*nt' and he's guilty as charged ie used abusing and \ or insulting words.......

The FA arent going to make themselves look silly for taking blatter and all these east european countries to task over 'monkey' chants then, let such a high profile case as this be found not guilty.

 

Secondly, denis smith who is on this panel trying Suarez, is well known admirer of ferguson. In a court of law, the defence team is allowed to reject a number of jurors but the FA's own procedures do not allow this.

 

The FA's panel should have been totally independent. It is not. it just pays lips service to independence.

 

Then there is evra himslef who the FA have found in the past to be 'less than reliable' in his version of the battle of stamford Bridge and the groundsman.

 

His testimony should be blown out of the water if as he claims, the 'tv cameras' havent picked up the verbal abuse 'ten times' as he has said it was clearly eveident.

 

However, the FA's fuck ups here could well give us grounds for appeal. There again, if the FA appoint a similar panel, who's to bet an appeal wont result in a longer ban (how the fuck do they get away with 'if you appeal the ban may be extended' and natural justice?).

 

Bunch of twats.

[TheHowieLama]

Yeah, then they could of exchanged shirts and give each other the beso doble, no hard feelings between Scots are there?

 

As for the chatter about courts and lawsuits - the fella did not shank anyone, there is no civil suit. There are more offensive tags in this thread - it is not a crime FFS.

Anyone else think it is a coincidence that one of the incidents is being handled by the very broad definition of FA guilt is a brwon guy on a foreigner and the other happened in the cush of the inner circle of London and is between a family member of the evil empire and a lifemong (reported "allegedly") by a member of the public to the fuzz (who were unaware then did nothing at the time) ? This also implies someone from the stands or a derp watching on the feed decided it was important enough to make a stand - after the fact.

[TheHowieLama]

he shoulda taken a bite out of him.

[El Rojo]

With the revelation of that 'You're only booking me because I'm black' line in the Telegraph this week, I'm becoming increasingly convinced that the Steve Finnan 'deaf fan complaint' was independently engineered.

[Major Tom]

Well, not yet. At least you got fast fingers, clerical is your best bet.

 

Cheese, Howie, something's rocked your boat but I just ain't feeling it in return. Peace, brother. Chill the fuck out!

[norwichlfc]

So Evra has admitted that he used racist language towards Suarez but will not face any punishment?? How the hell does that work then?

 

If he has admitted saying a racist comment then surely they should look at what he said to.

[ngogswilly]

So Evra has admitted that he used racist language towards Suarez but will not face any punishment?? How the hell does that work then?

 

If he has admitted saying a racist comment then surely they should look at what he said to.

 

Ah but you forget this a manc player we're dealing with.

 

And between half the country not having the cojones to do anything about the shit they get away with and the other half calling you crazy for even suggesting there might be anything unfair going on.

 

They'll continue to get away with just about anything aside from the odd indiscretion they make which is so bad the FA is basically left no choice but to do something.

[A_S]

Claiming he was booked because he's black is accusing Marriner of a race-influenced decision which is fairly outrageous but seems to have been overshadowed by everything else.

[xerxes]

I've no doubt Suarez will be found guilty over this.etc..........

The devil is in the detail here, San Don. Found guilty of what?

 

What happened when Evra and Whiskeynose went to see Mariner after the game? What did he see, and what did he hear? That evidence will be key.

 

I think that the likelihood of Evra being found guilty of racial abuse is small because of linguistic ambiguity, (and therefore intent) and the consequences of a guilty verdict for the FA. Guilty of abusive words, insulting behaviour? It depends what the witnesses say, but that is a low grade offence.

 

Appealing the constitution of the committee is futile – we signed up to the rules. Speculating on the basis for an appeal on an adjudication that has not yet been made is unwise.

 

It is always wise to seek judgement on a case on the basis of its specific merits. If you have to resort to discrediting the complainant it can backfire as reflecting poorly on the case for the defence.