Quantcast
The FA publish written reasons for Suarez's ban - Page 15 - FF - Football Forum - The Liverpool Way Jump to content

Recommended Posts

This, is a massive pointer to discredit evra's reliability imo. united never make us turn around and kick into the kop in the first half.

 

I cannot remember a time in the last 10 years when they have made us switched ends.

 

Why the fuck would they start doing that in this game? Just because the colour of the coin was blue?

 

That's true but I was at the game mate and Evra was going potty at the ref at kick-off and the important point here is that he started the game in a red mist and kept at it the whole 90 mins. That had fuck all to do with Suarez and racism.

 

This must have been pointed out in our evidence but although the Commission accept that he was angry at the start they don't take this as a reason for his behaviour later on. Instead they take the view that his anger at the corner was directly related to the abuse he was receiving from Suarez when all of us who were there could see he was at it the whole game with spats at several other players, the crowd and the ref.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The FA claim that English footballs reputation has been harmed. Is that the reputation that lost our bid for the World Cup? According to 'Whoops my hair has slipped off the back of my head' David Davies, we have sent a message around the world.

 

This of course was in keeping with the BBCs PC brigade that his opinion was unchallenged. As was the one on Sky News by another 'loose canon' from a 'Red Top'.

 

I suggest Davis has a word with Bascombe Re. coiffures as he seems in his recent article to be more interested in Andy Carrolls hair than his footballing ability.

 

In conclusion who on earth would believe the credibility of that little turd Evra. Just ask the French squad and Chelsea FC.

 

This leaves me in no doubt whatsoever that this is a massive witch hunt. If Suarez is guilty as they are trying to make out I have no doubt whatsoever LFC would show him the out door quicker than he came in.

We will stand by our man as the King is doing. YNWA

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I'd like to hear from the lawyers on here not someone who has watched The Rainmaker 10 times.

 

can somebody please summarise the report for me?

 

not a lawyer but the summary of the document makes it pretty clear (Pages 111 to 115)

 

in simplest terms

 

decision was based on probability (which wouldnt be enough in a court of law by the way), given the inconsistencies in our evidence and witnesses and Suarez changing his statement following cross examination the panel considered it was more 'probable' that Evra's account of event was accurate

 

the nature of the decision being based on probability is being ignored by most commenting on the decision (TV etc.) and they are discussing it as though the outcome was based on absolute fact

 

it seems laughable that a decision this important can be made in this way but there you go

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The following comment was posted at slysports

 

midsred says January 1, 2012 10:06am

 

There are two critical points which automatically put Luis Suarez at an early disadvantage and if they had been present in a criminal case would have led to the case being thrown out. First, it appears that the FA procedure on initial interview by the match Referee after the match led to Evra and his Manager being interviewed and contemporaneous notes of that interview being written by the 4th official. Suarez was not interviewed due to his lack of English language so he did not have the immediate opportunity on the day to react to the accusations. That was critical in the investigation and could have helped to establish the truth at an early stage. As he is not fluent enough in English Suarez would have required an independant interpreter to keep matters legal and it appears that facility was either not considered or offered by the match official. Secondly, the contemporaneous notes written by the 4th Official were, for some unexplained reason, destroyed by the Referee after he wrote up his match report. This is vital evidence and should have been retiained. Again this throws some considerable doubt on the validity of the investigation process and if such actions had been made in a criminal case then it would not have passed Crown Prosecution service scrutiny and it is highly unlikely that a case would have been put to Court. I know this is not a Criminal case but surely the same principles of evidence gathering should apply to be fair to all parties. It appears to me that Mr Suarez was always on the back-foot when having to defend these accusations as the FA and Referee procedures acted against him from the start.

 

Is this true,as I don't have the mental strength to read the full thing again, because that is very suspicious

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
You sound like that twat on 5live yesterday.

 

The more I read on here the more it depresses me. As Liverpool fans we should wisen up. We would get much more respect if Suarez apologizes and for Dalglish to come out and apologize for the t-shirt thing. If we are not careful we will be getting docked points.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 years ago then. And before that?

 

Only that you said you couldn't remember.

 

With so much wrong in that report I'm surprised (given your quality posts) that you need to point this out.

 

Given their previous record here (3 defeats in a row) Im not sure you can say switching ends was so unbelievable.

 

Evra's reaction to the coin toss was more indicative of how 'on edge' he was before the game even started.

 

Interestingly, one media Manc Mark Chapman made a reference to Evra "being chippy from the off". Ironic too, since 'chippy' is a bit of a shit word to use for black people since there is a small inference of 'getting above your station' which they generally dislike.

 

I guess it shows that everyone will have to be extremely careful what they say in future.

 

Or y'know, carry on like before and believe crucifying suarez solves all our ills.

 

Really not sure which will happen......

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The FA claim that English footballs reputation has been harmed. Is that the reputation that lost our bid for the World Cup? According to 'Whoops my hair has slipped off the back of my head' David Davies, we have sent a message around the world.

 

This of course was in keeping with the BBCs PC brigade that his opinion was unchallenged. As was the one on Sky News by another 'loose canon' from a 'Red Top'.

 

I suggest Davis has a word with Bascombe Re. coiffures as he seems in his recent article to be more interested in Andy Carrolls hair than his footballing ability.

 

In conclusion who on earth would believe the credibility of that little turd Evra. Just ask the French squad and Chelsea FC.

 

This leaves me in no doubt whatsoever that this is a massive witch hunt. If Suarez is guilty as they are trying to make out I have no doubt whatsoever LFC would show him the out door quicker than he came in.

We will stand by our man as the King is doing. YNWA

 

This always had an air of "hey Blatter, remember you didn't give us the world cup? you know those comments you made about racism on the pitch being left on the pitch and resolved with a handshake at the end of the game? this is how we deal with racism on the pitch. fuck you blatter"

 

England get the world cup this isn't an issue.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest San Don
is it not more likely they win very few tosses or if it was a midday kick off on a sunny day they'd want our keeper looking into the sun first half? what end would that mean playing into?

 

They have a 50 \ 50 chance of winning the toss. united dont really care about which end teams prefer to kick into as they believe they are good enough to win no matter what other teams superstition may be.

 

I've rarely seen united make us swap ends even when they win the toss.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest Numero Veinticinco
The following comment was posted at slysports

 

midsred says January 1, 2012 10:06am

 

There are two critical points which automatically put Luis Suarez at an early disadvantage and if they had been present in a criminal case would have led to the case being thrown out. First, it appears that the FA procedure on initial interview by the match Referee after the match led to Evra and his Manager being interviewed and contemporaneous notes of that interview being written by the 4th official. Suarez was not interviewed due to his lack of English language so he did not have the immediate opportunity on the day to react to the accusations. That was critical in the investigation and could have helped to establish the truth at an early stage. As he is not fluent enough in English Suarez would have required an independant interpreter to keep matters legal and it appears that facility was either not considered or offered by the match official. Secondly, the contemporaneous notes written by the 4th Official were, for some unexplained reason, destroyed by the Referee after he wrote up his match report. This is vital evidence and should have been retiained. Again this throws some considerable doubt on the validity of the investigation process and if such actions had been made in a criminal case then it would not have passed Crown Prosecution service scrutiny and it is highly unlikely that a case would have been put to Court. I know this is not a Criminal case but surely the same principles of evidence gathering should apply to be fair to all parties. It appears to me that Mr Suarez was always on the back-foot when having to defend these accusations as the FA and Referee procedures acted against him from the start.

 

Is this true,as I don't have the mental strength to read the full thing again, because that is very suspicious

 

Nice catch.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

At the end of the day this wasn't about proving who said what, it wasn't a search for the truth, it wasn't about establishing racism. At the end of the day it was about whose "legal argument" was most flimsy. And we won that, quite handsomely. Our legal argument wasn't even consistent with itself. Own goal.

 

I think this has been a real eye-opener for Kenny. Based on how he reacted you could tell he thought this was something that this was just a typical post-game whine and sour grapes cocktail and that sense would prevail, people would act like grown-ups and with respect.

 

Now he realizes the game has indeed moved on. QCs, legal submissions, independent assessments from people with PhD's in cultural anthropology. I don't think he was prepared for that. But a lot of people have said for a long time the battle ground is now vaster. It's in the corridors of the PL, FA, equity markets, the commercial market place, the media.

 

You have to hold your own in all those places or you will be shafted and we're not even close in most. Kenny will understand that even better now, as Benitez did (it was benitez remember who complained that one of our legal guys was a manchester united director). We need to drop the whole queensberry rules bullshit and play by the rules that are clearly in force.

 

And Xerxes is right while Ayres has done no wrong, he hasn't yet got us punching our weight in those arenas. Of course we don't know if he's tried, but it's clear we are not there yet. Robinson would have been pulling levers, working the back-channel, lighting fires and this wouldn't have even come to a charge. Until we have that same clout we will get butt-fucked by people who don't play by the rules and do have that clout.

 

Alas for this case the legal argument was so bad we probably need to tactically withdraw and lick our wounds.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest San Don
Only that you said you couldn't remember.

 

With so much wrong in that report I'm surprised (given your quality posts) that you need to point this out.

 

Given their previous record here (3 defeats in a row) Im not sure you can say switching ends was so unbelievable.

 

Evra's reaction to the coin toss was more indicative of how 'on edge' he was before the game even started.

 

Interestingly, one media Manc Mark Chapman made a reference to Evra "being chippy from the off". Ironic too, since 'chippy' is a bit of a shit word to use for black people since there is a small inference of 'getting above your station' which they generally dislike.

 

I guess it shows that everyone will have to be extremely careful what they say in future.

 

Or y'know, carry on like before and believe crucifying suarez solves all our ills.

 

Really not sure which will happen......

 

And I honestly meant that. I dont recall them making us swap ends. They have won the toss on ocassions exemplified by us kicking off and defending the kop in the first half.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The following comment was posted at slysports

 

midsred says January 1, 2012 10:06am

 

There are two critical points which automatically put Luis Suarez at an early disadvantage and if they had been present in a criminal case would have led to the case being thrown out. First, it appears that the FA procedure on initial interview by the match Referee after the match led to Evra and his Manager being interviewed and contemporaneous notes of that interview being written by the 4th official. Suarez was not interviewed due to his lack of English language so he did not have the immediate opportunity on the day to react to the accusations. That was critical in the investigation and could have helped to establish the truth at an early stage. As he is not fluent enough in English Suarez would have required an independant interpreter to keep matters legal and it appears that facility was either not considered or offered by the match official. Secondly, the contemporaneous notes written by the 4th Official were, for some unexplained reason, destroyed by the Referee after he wrote up his match report. This is vital evidence and should have been retiained. Again this throws some considerable doubt on the validity of the investigation process and if such actions had been made in a criminal case then it would not have passed Crown Prosecution service scrutiny and it is highly unlikely that a case would have been put to Court. I know this is not a Criminal case but surely the same principles of evidence gathering should apply to be fair to all parties. It appears to me that Mr Suarez was always on the back-foot when having to defend these accusations as the FA and Referee procedures acted against him from the start.

 

Is this true,as I don't have the mental strength to read the full thing again, because that is very suspicious

 

Dowd wrote four bullet points down, Marriner copied them into his official report and then chucked Dowd's stuff. Doesn't seem that big a deal to me.

 

As to Suarez not having a chance to state his case, it was US who stopped him going to see the ref. So, ...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
They have a 50 \ 50 chance of winning the toss. united dont really care about which end teams prefer to kick into as they believe they are good enough to win no matter what other teams superstition may be.

 

I've rarely seen united make us swap ends even when they win the toss.

 

I can think of 5 post Ferguson, which isn't a lot but not really proof positive that they never do it and that Evra's behaviour was so strange.

 

With the coin toss cutting United's chances by 50%, maybe it's the one bit of luck we can point to since the cunt was smuggled over the border in a sealed contamination proof container!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
The more I read on here the more it depresses me. As Liverpool fans we should wisen up. We would get much more respect if Suarez apologizes and for Dalglish to come out and apologize for the t-shirt thing. If we are not careful we will be getting docked points.

Will we fuck.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest San Don
Dowd wrote four bullet points down, Marriner copied them into his official report and then chucked Dowd's stuff. Doesn't seem that big a deal to me.

 

As to Suarez not having a chance to state his case, it was US who stopped him going to see the ref. So, ...

 

I think it is. Dowd isnt any good at shorthand to my knowledge and had to ask for clarification on spelling spanish words.

 

I think its a bit incredible original documents referred to in this case were casually destroyed by the ref. Again, this leads towards different interpretation being involved. Did mariner copy word for word? Why destroy the original notes when the ref admitted by his completion of a 'serious incident report' that, this was a serious issue? It actually beggars belief that these notes were so casually destroyed.

 

I can think of 5 post Ferguson, which isn't a lot but not really proof positive that they never do it and that Evra's behaviour was so strange.

 

With the coin toss cutting United's chances by 50%, maybe it's the one bit of luck we can point to since the cunt was smuggled over the border in a sealed contamination proof container!

 

I bow to your better memory. As I said, I dont recall them making us swap ends.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

 

I bow to your better memory. As I said, I dont recall them making us swap ends.

 

Which is the nice way of calling me an arl twat!

 

And they say there are no manners any more.

 

Obviously I'm being as picky as you, but when the alsation rips the baby's face off it seems odd to complain about hairs on the couch!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Guest San Don
Which is the nice way of calling me an arl twat!

 

And they say there are no manners any more.

 

Obviously I'm being as picky as you, but when the alsation rips the baby's face off it seems odd to complain about hairs on the couch!

 

No its not. Stop being touchy. I honestly cannot remember united making us turn.

 

If I've rubbed you up the wrong way, it was totally unintentional. I didnt think 'I bow to your better memory' as being condescending. If you think it was, I apologise.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
No its not. Stop being touchy. I honestly cannot remember united making us turn.

 

If I've rubbed you up the wrong way, it was totally unintentional. I didnt think 'I bow to your better memory' as being condescending. If you think it was, I apologise.

 

I was joking, mate.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think it is. Dowd isnt any good at shorthand to my knowledge and had to ask for clarification on spelling spanish words.

 

I think its a bit incredible original documents referred to in this case were casually destroyed by the ref. Again, this leads towards different interpretation being involved. Did mariner copy word for word? Why destroy the original notes when the ref admitted by his completion of a 'serious incident report' that, this was a serious issue? It actually beggars belief that these notes were so casually destroyed.

 

It's easy to say that looking back through the lens of a quasi-legal process. But he's a ref not a stenographer, he provided his official report.

 

And you can poke all the holes in it you want, it doesn't change the fact Suarez was convicted by his and our own inconsistencies. They refused to believe his testimony because of two key items.

 

1. The "Drafting error", we made a claim that was clearly not true and said "oh, we put that in the wrong place of the report".

2. The fact his witnesses said different things to him.

 

Because of those two reasons they decided to take everything Evra said at face value. Everything else is a side-show and it all comes down to the fact we didn't get our shit together. 4 bullets point would have made NO difference.

 

In fact the bullet points are best left out of it, because even there Comoli's testimony conflicts with that of both officials and I wouldn't trust us to be able to argue that point without shooting ourselves in the foot again.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

All of this crap is in hindsight.

IMO Suarez told the truth right from the get.

Evra - at best embellished the truth - very probably a partial "fabrication". Ferguson saw an opportunity to gain an advantage and took it without regard.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So we accept the ban then Piscinin?

 

I don't know the options to be honest. It's clearly a bullshit case against us, but we couldn't even handle that. How would we fare after having hamstrung ourselves with our own testimony? If we do fuck it up again, how well could we contain the damage etc. Not at all IMO.

 

Appealing to the FA would be a waste of time. Maybe if we went to CAS we could present an entirely new legal argument, but anything involving our current legal argument is futile IMO.

 

This is now a Machiavellian enterprise and we are clearly rank amateurs at it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I don't know the options to be honest. It's clearly a bullshit case against us, but we couldn't even handle that. How would we fare after having hamstrung ourselves with our own testimony? If we do fuck it up again, how well could we contain the damage etc. Not at all IMO.

 

Appealing to the FA would be a waste of time. Maybe if we went to CAS we could present an entirely new legal argument, but anything involving our current legal argument is futile IMO.

 

This is now a Machiavellian enterprise and we are clearly rank amateurs at it.

 

Can't - they only rule on if the association in question has properly enforced their regulations - nothing to do with the nuts and bolts of the case itself.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
All of this crap is in hindsight.

IMO Suarez told the truth right from the get.

Evra - at best embellished the truth - very probably a partial "fabrication". Ferguson saw an opportunity to gain an advantage and took it without regard.

 

Personally, I don't think anyone has told the truth, the whole truth and nothing but the truth. Everyone has worked on spinning their story to best suit their case. We just made it really obvious we'd spun ours.

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

×