The FA publish written reasons for Suarez's ban

[Guest LFD]

Also ask the FA why they haven't investigated Ferguson after that disapatches programme with his dodgy Asian mate!

[ngogswilly]

You can see its blatantly another stitch up too.

 

The FA have released this with the intention of avoiding any possible focus on Evra but rather placing the focus on the unreliability of Suarez.

 

SKY news have it as one of their main headlines right now "Suarez unbelievable and unreliable"

 

One thing the club need to do now is call a press conference and point out even a bit of the already numerous flaws that average Joes like us can see.

 

Because the FA are just making us look like amateurs here. They've fucked Luis over big time once again this evening.

 

They are going to let the entire world think Evra's bullshit testimony is the truth.

 

We can't let that go unchallenged.

[J-V]

Fuck off.

 

Is right.

[TommyW]

If this was a real court how do you think it woulda went, I'll tell you it wouldn't have even got near a court, farce of a case, a civil court would charge the fa for time wasting

 

agreed

[TheHowieLama]

Fuck off. And they blatantly arent anyway so even considering the if is silly.

 

I am not saying he did but if the lad said it ( or if anyone has/does/did for that matter) there is no excuse, don't play games.

[Guest LFD]

Evra clearly does accept that he wasn't being called what he thought he was being called and there is no suggestion that if he had realised the word was 'negro' and understand how it is genreally used that he would still have taken it as a racial slur, in fact his submission that he doesn't think Suarez is racist would back that up. If there had been any common sense, that would have been enough for the whole thing to be chucked out.

[usernameunknown]

I am not saying he did but if the lad said it ( or if anyone has/does/did for that matter) there is no excuse, don't play games.

 

You dont boot someone out because he said a few words to someone no matter how nasty it is. You educate him and then if nothing changes in the future then obviously you take further action ie getting rid.

[3 Colours Red]

It seems saying "your sisters cunt" to an opponent is not offensive at all based on the readily assumed fact that the word is less taboo in Spanish. Later in the report, the FA simply directly translate it as "fucking hell" in an obvious effort to reduce its impact. Where are all the arguments that Evra has been in England for years and should know the literal meaning of what he is saying.

[loadsoftrophies]

Is this as bad as it looks....

 

138. Mr Comolli said in his witness statement that Mr Suarez told him nothing happened. He

said that there was one incident where he said sorry to Mr Evra and Mr Evra told him

"Don't touch me, South American" to which Mr Comolli thought Mr Suarez said he had

replied "Por que, tu eres negro?". Mr Suarez was emphatic that he had not said anything

that could be classified as racial abuse. Mr Comolli confirmed under cross-examination

that he believed that what he was told by Mr Suarez in this meeting was that the words he

had used to Mr Evra translated as "Why, because you are black

 

141. Mr Suarez's version of this conversation was as follows. He said that Mr Comolli

explained to him that Sir Alex Ferguson and Mr Evra had complained to the referee that

Mr Suarez had racially insulted Mr Evra five times during the game. Mr Comolli asked Mr Suarez to tell him what happened. Mr Suarez told him that Mr Evra had said to him

"Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez had said "Por que negro?". Mr Suarez told

Mr Comolli that this was the only thing he had said.

 

Seems to me Suarez changed his phrase to cover himself or have i read it wrong?

[Guest San Don]

There's more fucking shite in this report. The commission maintains Suarez touching the back of evra's head was meant in a confrontational manner. But if you look at the video the opposite is plainly obvious.

 

When mariner pulls them to him, suarez touches the ref as if to say 'ok.' Is that a confrontaional manner then because its only a couple of seconds latter he touches evra as if to say 'ok, lets get on with it.'

 

There's so much shit in this report we really do have to take this further. The opposition counsel is beligerent in his questioning of Suarez. evra changes the facts on what his claim is based on, being called nigger, being called nigger 10 times and he's a 'credible' witness while Suarez isnt despite having to use an interpreter throughout the whole fucking proceedings?

 

And how fucking naive do you have to be to swallow this "We considered it improbable that Mr Evra would act in such a dishonest way in order to damage the reputation of a fellow professional"

[TheHowieLama]

You dont boot someone out because he said a few words to someone no matter how nasty it is. You educate him and then if nothing changes in the future then obviously you take further action ie getting rid.

 

I hate to tell you pal but that is not stuff you get educated on.

[ngogswilly]

Is this as bad as it looks....

 

138. Mr Comolli said in his witness statement that Mr Suarez told him nothing happened. He

said that there was one incident where he said sorry to Mr Evra and Mr Evra told him

"Don't touch me, South American" to which Mr Comolli thought Mr Suarez said he had

replied "Por que, tu eres negro?". Mr Suarez was emphatic that he had not said anything

that could be classified as racial abuse. Mr Comolli confirmed under cross-examination

that he believed that what he was told by Mr Suarez in this meeting was that the words he

had used to Mr Evra translated as "Why, because you are black

 

141. Mr Suarez's version of this conversation was as follows. He said that Mr Comolli

explained to him that Sir Alex Ferguson and Mr Evra had complained to the referee that

Mr Suarez had racially insulted Mr Evra five times during the game. Mr Comolli asked Mr Suarez to tell him what happened. Mr Suarez told him that Mr Evra had said to him

"Don't touch me, South American". Mr Suarez had said "Por que negro?". Mr Suarez told

Mr Comolli that this was the only thing he had said.

 

Seems to me Suarez changed his phrase to cover himself or have i read it wrong?

 

But that doesn't even make sense.

 

Evra says "Dont touch me South American" to which Suarez replies "Why because you're black"...unless it was a question.

 

As in Suarez was asking Why shouldn't I touch you, because you're black???

 

I mean maybe I'm missing something in linguistic nuances but the exchange Commolli says happened doesn't make any sense.

 

The one Suarez gave makes more sense.

[jmckenna]

Well i am pressing the Vatican to have Evra canonised.

He truly is a fucking saint that man.

[usernameunknown]

I hate to tell you pal but that is not stuff you get educated on.

 

You cant change someones opinions? I dont agree.

[Guest LFD]

Marriner's report;

 

I said to Sir Alex and Patrice that I would include the incident in my report but needed to speak to Liverpool manager Kenny Dalglish to seek Luis Suarez' version of events.

 

United manager and player on first name terms!?

[zico]

Fuck the FA, take them as far as we can, preferably to the human rights commission... This is as stitch up a job as possible...

 

Unbelievable how Ginsoak works his magic and runs the game...(and those jokers at the FA)

 

Suarez would be in his full rights to sue Evra for slander. And club should release a statement going after the other manc cunts with their coordinated stories!

 

If the journalists who have attacked Suarez do not question the evidence they claimed would be conclusive then nothing will - not that I think they will, the shower of manc cunts....

[RedAdmiral]

How can they give him an 8 match ban when they admit themselves that the verdict was not "beyond all reasonable doubt". You can't condemn him on the basis he was 'probably' guilty, it just makes them look like amateurs. This wont stand, at the very least I expect the 'sentence' to be reduced. Interesting!

[TheHowieLama]

But that doesn't even make sense.

 

Evra says "Dont touch me South American" to which Suarez replies "Why because you're black"...unless it was a question.

 

As in Suarez was asking Why shouldn't I touch you, because you're black???

 

I mean maybe I'm missing something in linguistic nuances but the exchange Commolli says happened doesn't make any sense.

 

The one Suarez gave makes more sense.

 

One is saying "Why, because you are Black?".

[RobbieOR]

I hope we come out with another statement showing the report to be the bollocks that it is.

 

We won't get anywhere with an FA appeal anyway, he'll get the ban and we should take it to a real court.

 

The problem is, the FA done something themselves a few years ago to stop clubs challenging them in a real court.

[TheHowieLama]

You cant change someones opinions? I dont agree.

 

About stuff like that - not often.

[TheHowieLama]

The problem is, the FA done something themselves a few years ago to stop clubs challenging them in a real court.

 

That would be with regards to the ban itself and their involvement.

[RedAdmiral]

The problem is, the FA done something themselves a few years ago to stop clubs challenging them in a real court.

 

Doesn't stop Luis with our full support taking them to court though!

[Guest davelfc]

Mr Evra added, in his supplemental statement, that when he answered the question, he mentioned that a word had been said to him ten times. He told us that he did not mean this in the literal sense, it was just a way of talking. In French, he said, it is common to say something like "more than 10 times" but for you not to mean that it was actually over 10 times. It was just a figure of speech.

 

I'm surprised he didn't go with the 'terry excuse' "what I said was 'I didn't say he said it 10 times"

Which would make more sense than the shit above which the FA chose to swallow.

[Guest San Don]

In a nutshell for whatever reason we have submitted inconsistencies in our defence - from moment of speaking to ref after game to during the hearing and that has led to Evra being viewed as a more reliable witness and his version of events is more consistent with the video evidence - specifically the skin pinching evidence.

 

The danger is whether we can win an appeal or risk extending the ban. I half wonder whether we will accept the ban but refute the FA's findings.

 

evra's testimony has just as many holes in it. Its clear he's also been coached by united and was given video that was not made available to Suarez LFC by the FA until our silk became aware of it during the preceedings and asked to have sight of it which the commission agreed.

 

Just why evra's testimony is deemed more reliable because he was more at ease is fuck all excuse. Suarez hardly speaks a word of english and had to use the interpretor. evra changes his story as much as anyone else but he's deemed 'reliable' while other arent?

 

That highlights a lot of dangers and concerns since this case centers around interpretation between spanish, english, french and dutch.

[ngogswilly]

Well lets just say, even if by some fucked up process, we can't appeal this.

 

The very bare minimum the club needs to do is call a fucking press conference and tear that report to pieces.

 

Or if they can't do it themselves for fear of some bullshit charge then make sure any journos we have that are friendly to us go to town on the bullshit in that report.