The FA publish written reasons for Suarez's ban

[johnb]

Where's that in t he report Mr K? It'll probably be the only thing in it that'll make any sense to me!

[Guest LFD]

They say that Suarez's evidence was not consistent with contemperaneous accounts (or words to that effect.)

 

But Evra says Suarez said some very racist remarks, but then said Suarez isn't a racist... that's hardly consistent!

[Guest LFD]

Innocent until proven guilty, I don't think this report proves anything.

[satansmutt]

I don't see how the club or Suarez can just accept the 8 game ban, it's an admission of guilt, they have to fight it all the way. I dont know what avenues are open to them reguarding appeals or legal action but there is nothing from the FA with any real proof, it's just one mans word against anothers.

[goatboy59]

Did the United players say anything other than "well he seemed upset"?

 

We could have told you that when he went off on one with the referee over the coin toss.

[VladimirIlyich]

Just as I thought,complete and utter bollocks and lies on the part of Evra.

 

Please LFC lawyers go and rip this shite to threads as it should be.

[HolyHank]

They have no video evidence, but Dirk stated that Suarez used the word "negro" once. Luis also said he used the word "negro", but not in a offensive way. Nonetheless, FA says that they believe Evra, and that they find it proved that Suarez said:

(1) In response to Mr Evra's question "Concha de tu hermana, porque me diste in

golpe" ("Fucking hell, why did you kick me"), Mr Suarez said "Porque tu eres

negro" ("Because you are black").

(2) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada"

("say it to me again, I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "No hablo con los

negros" ("I don't speak to blacks").

(3) In response to Mr Evra's comment "Ahora te voy a dar realmente una porrada"

("okay, now I think I'm going to punch you"), Mr Suarez said "Dale, negro,

negro, negro" ("okay, blackie, blackie, blackie).

98

(4) When the referee blew his whistle to stop the corner being taken, Mr Suarez used

the word "negro" to Mr Evra.

(5) After the referee had spoken to the players for a second time, and Mr Evra had

said that he did not want Mr Suarez to touch him, Mr Suarez said "Por que,

negro?".

 

Basically, they say that they believe everything Evra, naming him "a very impressive witness".

[Bobby Hundreds]

Sky just read out evra's statement to coincide with the footage, it paints a very bad picture though still not enough.

[christhered]

Basing their evidence on Saurez's failure to communicate, when it is something as serious as this why the fuck are a bunch of minions around allowed to dictate a man's reputation.

 

Not sure how the appeal process works or if it is heard by a different panel, but if he is found not guilty, sue the F.A and the members of the hearing for everything they are worth.

 

Ive got a feeling our lawyers will rip them to fuck, seems as if they are basing they're opinions because that little cunt can speak better english than our man...... Fuck the F.A

[Horus]

Did the United players say anything other than "well he seemed upset"?

 

We could have told you that when he went off on one with the referee over the coin toss.

 

Racist.

[WoOGii]

Didn’t think of that bit at all – the statement from Evra cannot possibly be true if both the FA and Evra say he isn’t actually a racist. Fucking stinks.

[Barzini]

Some quite unbelivable stuff in that document:

 

The number of times that Mr Evra said Mr Suarez used the word "negro".

276. Mr Haughan said that when he overheard Sir Alex Ferguson complain to the referee after

the match, he heard him say that Mr Suarez had called Mr Evra a nigger "five times". If

that is true, it is probable that Mr Evra was the source for Sir Alex's figure. Mr Evra said in

his evidence to us that he had been called "negro" five times, namely (1) "Porque tu eres

negro", (2) "No hablo con los negros", and (3) "Dale negro, negro, negro". Thus, it might

appear that Mr Haughan's evidence supports Mr Evra's evidence that the word was used

five times in the goalmouth.

 

How exactly does that support Evra's evidence if all he's done is overheard the tramp saying that Evra has been called a nigger 5 times?

 

Evra tells Slur that he's been called a nigger 5 times, Slur tells the ref that Evra's been called a nigger 5 times, someone overhears this and that is somehow corroborating evidence?

 

Stitch up.

[Acid]

Can anyone answer this for me, if we appeal, will the ban be held until the appeal is resolved? Meaning based on that evidence it'll either be over very quickly in our favour, or dragged out. He could serve the ban very late in the season?

[Mathewbet1]

That report looks laughable, any lawyer worth his salt could take the FA to the cleaners, no wonder the club have been so bullish in their defence of Suarez. They have no evidence.

[PaulMcC]

So we just have to go to a higher court and he'll be cleared.

[DooooodekNo5]

It's unsatisfying in that I have not yet read any part showing the basis of proof of the contended part (the other six times), but I don't see any room for appeal unless there is firm, contradictory evidence to hand.

 

The FA have made their decision on what he said, I have no idea what they have based it on (other than Evra's allegation).

 

I think that'll be that. We'll wait until after Tuesday and then take the ban probably, unless they are appealing for a reduction on the basis of historical punishments and the fact that all parties agree that Suarez is not a racist.

 

You really think after the clubs statement at the guilty verdict and all the t-shirt buisness that the clubs just going to say ok thats that and bend over and take it ?

 

We were always going to appeal as soon as he got a guilty verdict by a kangaroo court.

 

 

 

Also how long did it take Evra to realise he was apparantly being called 'Black' and not 'nigger' ? ive only read a bit so far but it looks full of contradictions on Evras part regarding this.

[Anubis]

There is no way that Evra's account takes place in a crowded goalmouth and nobody hears it. Get the camera evidence. There is no way Suarez has that protracted exchange with Evra and nobody else catches any of it.

[TheDrowningMan]

Sky just read out evra's statement to coincide with the footage, it paints a very bad picture though still not enough.

 

I don't think it paints much of a picture. There has simply been a link created in your mind, just as there would if it were discovered that they were having a mild tiff over a dodgy tip on a horse.

 

Evra would have to be remarkably balanced and cool not to properly square up to and, frankly, punch Suarez if he'd laid all of that on the table. That seems u likely given what we know of his nature and his demeanour on the day of the match.

 

Any deployment of lip reading experts? If Suarez said all that he did and there's some video evidence plenty of it will definitely have been caught in camera. It was in the penalty area afterall.

[TheDrowningMan]

There is no way that Evra's account takes place in a crowded goalmouth and nobody hears it. Get the camera evidence. There is no way Suarez has that protracted exchange with Evra and nobody else catches any of it.

 

Oh come on, it's perfectly reasonable that Spanish goalkeeper David De Gea wouldn't have heard any of a litany of racial epithets tossed around by Suarez in...Spanish. It only happened a few feet from his goal.

[Whelan]

I have not read this, but it seems that the conversation took place in Spanish, if that is the case then why did Evra say that he was called the N word 10 times and not add that it was in a conversation in Spanish?

[MLB]

The FA say that Suarez can't have said "negro" in a friendly way because they were engaged in an "acrimonious argument" - ignoring the fact that all of the acrimony appears to be coming from Evra.

[Bobby Hundreds]

I don't think it paints much of a picture. There has simply been a link created in your mind, just as there would if it were discovered that they were having a mild tiff over a dodgy tip on a horse.

 

Evra would have to be remarkably balanced and cool not to properly square up to and, frankly, punch Suarez if he'd laid all of that on the table. That seems u likely given what we know of his nature and his demeanour on the day of the match.

 

Any deployment of lip reading experts? If Suarez said all that he did and there's some video evidence plenty of it will definitely have been caught in camera. It was in the penalty area afterall.

 

It definitely paints a picture for the reason you stated, they coincided the reading of evra's account of events to the video footage, Suarez pinching the skin as they read out I don't speak to blacks.

[TheHowieLama]

Dear lord, its even worse than I expected.

 

Basically they've taken Evra's word over his.

 

They've left themselves open to serious challenge here, they must have.

 

And this is Evra's account of the story which reads like something a fucking 5 year old would make up.

The FA's case, in short, was as follows. In the goalmouth, Mr Evra and Mr Suarez spoke to each other in Spanish. Mr Evra asked Mr Suarez why he had kicked him, referring to the foul five minutes previously. Mr Suarez replied "Porque tu eres negro", meaning "Because you are black". Mr Evra then said to Mr Suarez “say it to me again, I’m going to punch you”. Mr Suarez replied "No hablo con los negros", meaning "I don't speak to blacks". Mr Evra continued by saying that he now thought he was going to punch Mr Suarez. Mr Suarez replied "Dale, negro, negro, negro", which meant "okay, blackie, blackie, blackie". As Mr Suarez said this, he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Kuyt then intervened. When the referee blew his whistle and called the players over to him shortly after the exchanges in the goalmouth, Mr Evra said to the referee "ref, ref, he just called me a fucking black".

 

This is Luis's version which actually sounds fairly fucking realistic going by just having watched the match

 

 

]

 

Without getting into the hesaid/she said - doesn't this part directly contradict what Marriner reported which is the only unbiased and official take on what may have happened?

[VladimirIlyich]

Did the United players say anything other than "well he seemed upset"?

 

We could have told you that when he went off on one with the referee over the coin toss.

 

This is something I've maintained all along,that the cunt was going to get somebody into bother straight from the coin toss cos he was wound up over nothing right there.

 

Cono.

[Red-Ed]

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.