Clearing Luis's name: time for the club and the fans to speak up

[jsjazz]

Agree with OP. Bending over and taking it as we have tried to do over the last week or so has just encouraged the feeding frenzy- we now have articles about LFC and Kenny being warned about future behaviour, FFS!

I don't think it will just go away- maybe quieten down, but it will still be simmering under the surface. Maybe because some of the press are hostile towards LFC, maybe some are up Ferguson's backside, maybe because Piara Power et al need to justify their existence, maybe because the FA establishment and their cronies in the press need to cock a snoot at FIFA and the rest of the world, maybe because Ferguson sees his end is in sight and wants to trash LFC as much as possible before he goes.

A press conference to explain the details and LFC's reasons for supporting Luis would be a good idea- there are still too many conflicting reports in the media, and a definitive clarification would be helpful.

1. LFC do not condone racism in any form.

2. What Luis said was not intended to be racist abuse. If he had thought it was racist, why would he admit saying it?

3. He did not call him "a negro".

4. The conversation was in Spanish, not English, and negro in Spanish does not mean "a negro" in English.

5. Highlight inconsistencies in Evra's evidence that were ignored. Use of Nigger, then Negro, then black. Number of times it was used. How have they arrived at the magic number 7? No supporting evidence.

etc etc.

 

What will it achieve? Emphasize that LFC do NOT condone racism, but in this case we do not believe this was racism. Give a single version of the facts that we can all use- e.g. there are still people saying he called him a negro- and some among our own fans!

 

Yes there is a risk of further vilification, but that is happening anyway. Every chant of "you manc bastard" and "who's the wanker in the black" for example will be deliberately misheard or misinterpreted.

 

We need to get our views across, firmly but not necessarily in a confrontational manner, and a press conference is the best way to do that, with widest coverage.

[TheTeflonJohn]

Might help

 

 

 

…

 

Thats a well balanced piece. Absolutely spot on. Just a shame that probably no media outlets will pick up on it and the vast majority reading it will be Reds only.

[Ezekiel 25:17]

As I said on the other thread, the best thing that could happen now is the Luis Suarez situation was not commented on again and the fan is prosecuted or whatever and not heard from again. I'm loving the idealism of a big fight back protest with all our ethnic fans united etc but the truth is it's fucking embarressing and will let every other club point and laugh a little more. This is football, fans aren't interested in what's true or false, what's right or wrong, they're interested in getting one over other clubs and having any reason to have a go. We could go to the highest court and clear his name (which won't happen) but it won't make a blind bit of difference, mind's are made up, they hardly needed a reason to hate him as it were. Everton, United, Chelsea, City and probably a few more are revelling in every minute of this so why prolong it with god awful campaigns and t shirts that will fix nothing. Get Luis back, take the shit for a few more months and move on, eventually something else will happen and the whole sorry affair will be off the back pages.

[Neil G]

I understand your frustration' date=' but what do you think it would accomplish?

 

Rival fans won't read a legal tome, most haven't even read the report on Suarez, they just take their cue from the press. The press have had ample time to dig into the inconsistencies of the report and have chosen not to, for whatever reasons.

 

It's a nice idea, but i fear all it would do is allow more papers to print headlines with the catchwords "Liverpool", "racist" and "Suarez", no matter what the angle of the story.

 

Ousely, Piara and any hack eager to build a rep will lay into us for being beligerent and not acepting the FA's decision and we may even face further penalties.

 

As much as i hate it, the deck is stacked against us, and i'd assume those within the club are better placed to know to what degree and how much further we could get fucked if we keep kicking.[/quote']

 

 

No, there's still a lot more the club can do, and I think you're underestimating what it could accomplish if it really took on the FA with the courage of its convictions.

 

For the repudiation of the report, I'm not suggesting a dry legal tome. I'm suggesting a press conference where representatives from the club make a punchy rebuttal of the report. It doesn't have to be a load of impenetrable legal detail, it just has to set out the following key arguments:

 

1) Liverpool FC and its fans have stood by Luis Suarez not because we condone racism, but because we believe there's no evidence at all that he's guilty of what he’s accused of, and thus his reputation and that of the club have been unfairly damaged as a result.

 

2) The FA Commission's report was wholly unreliable, because it wasn't based on evidence, just one man’s word against another's. This is all the more unacceptable because the Commission actually said that the more serious the charge, the higher the standard of proof has to be.

 

3) The Commission was wrong to conclude that Evra was a more reliable witness than Suarez, because the inconsistencies in his testimony are bigger than those in Luis's. Here the club can focus on the major ones, particularly the "5 times" (Ferguson) vs "10 times" (Evra on Canal +) versions, and "he called me black / negro" (Evra's complaint to the ref) vs "he called me a nigger" (implied on Canal +, plus Nani's statement and the report's own finding – see paras. 123 and 125 of the report). There are others, but these are the two that jump out.

 

4) The Commission was also wrong to cite Evra's calm demeanour during the hearing as a reason for believing his word over Luis's, because he a) wasn’t the one being accused, b) spoke better English than Luis, c) already had experience of an FA investigative process, and d) had the benefit of watching the footage again when giving his testimony, unlike Luis. This is an obvious case of bias.

 

As I said in my opening post, Tony Barrett showed how it could be done last Thursday in the Times. What he wrote would translate just fine to a verbal statement at a press conference.

 

As for the press's refusal to examine and present our side of the story, you say "for whatever reasons" as if it's a mystery, but it's really not. The reason the press haven't done this is because there's no story and no headline in it as things stand – as you've said, it's much easier and more profitable for them to run with the "Liverpool are racists" narrative. And the reason there's no story in putting our side across is because the club haven't put the message out forcefully enough in a way that can make headlines. There's a lot of mileage for the press in a "Liverpool call Evra a liar" story, and if we include enough memorable quotes that back up our case, these WILL make it into the papers.

 

On Ouseley, Powar et al, a strong case made in public will give us ammunition to fight back against them. The reason they keep going on about us being disrespectful and undermining the FA is that we as a club haven't given convincing enough arguments to counter their bollocks. Like I said in my opening post, in terms of media impact there's a world of difference between a statement in text published on the club's website, and a press conference where the world can see faces and hear words being spoken.

 

The way the club have allowed that gobshite Powar to run his mouth off without challenging him is a fucking disgrace. If they're dismissing him as an irrelevance they're wrong – he's in the media virtually every day and he's now built up a national platform to air his slanted agenda-driven views. Every time an anti-racist campaigner criticises us without us responding, our credibility and our anti-racist credentials take another hit. Slap him down, point out clearly why we disagree with him, and I guarantee you he'll pipe down.

 

As for the FA punishing us – if we put up a robust case and show that we're not going to be fucked over any more, they will find it a lot harder in political and PR terms to retaliate. Remember this isn't a court of law we're dealing with, it's a political organisation that can bow to pressure if it's applied in the right way. That's the entire reason why this whole thing has panned out this way in the first place.

 

Finally, your assumption that FSG know what they're doing on this isn't one I share. They've handled this poorly from the outset in my opinion, and I think a big part of that is that they still don't understand enough about how the power structures in and around English football work when it comes to the media and the FA. That's an inevitable result of them spending so little time in this country, and I think it's a big problem but that's a debate for another time.

[Neil G]

Thats it really. We just don't know how dangerous it would be to keep going. Thats why whatever happens in a sense it probably needs to be Luis privately or the Fans because the Club can't risk getting in too much more shit. But unfortunately I'm not sure giving up is the best idea either... its a conundrum.

 

In a sense I think some of our fanbase is now beginning to turn towards thinking letting it all drop and just getting on with our lives would be the best option. But I'm not so sure just walking away will help us in the long run, we've been badly bruised on this one and the old saying goes "Give them an inch they'll take a mile".

 

Well that well and truly applies to the media with us now. I've thought from day one failure to have a sting in our tail over this even if just retreating would leave us open to all sorts of shit in the future and even though we accepted the ban, the sting we attempted fell a bit flat. Not through our own fault but mainly because the media don't want to hear our side and will not allow it to put across fairly.

 

 

As I said to Babb'sBurstNad, the reason they don't want to hear our side and report it is because they don't consider it newsworthy enough. We can make it newsworthy if we do it clearly, convincingly and forcefully enough.

[Neil G]

Thanks for the replies everyone, whether you agree with me or not. Good to be back posting on here again.

 

I'm off to work now but will be back on here this evening and will reply to other posts then.

[Ezekiel 25:17]

Just to add neil I can completely see where you're coming from and respect the time and effort gone into your posts. I do stand by what I said though and I think we all know that none of what you have said will happen, by taking the ban it's pretty clear we are resided to the fact no more can be done so I don't know what's left than to just move on, I feel aggrieved, frustrated and angry like many other fans and no doubt not even a fraction of what Luis feels but no good can be done, actually to rephrase it's more of a case of will be done.

[ngogswilly]

I think IMO the whole represents a huge challenge.

 

People are right we need to move on and look inwards instead of lashing but I also think people are kidding themselves if they think this will be the end of it all.

 

The media are like the playground bully to us now, until we put them in their place they are going to keep coming after us. It might die down a little for now but the next excuse they get it will all hands to the pump on the Anti-LFC bandwagon again.

 

Thats why lashing out sometimes works if done correctly. Unfortunately all the lashing we've done hasn't really highlighted our points too well nor have we been afforded the chance in a way.

 

Maybe all we can do in the future is try and handle our PR better but I think theres more to the issue than that and its unfair for people to point solely at our PR and say thats the whole reason this whole mess is in the present state its in. Yes we've handled things badly but the whole situation was hardly fair and reasonable from the get go was it.

[Major Tom]

The media are like the playground bully to us now, until we put them in their place they are going to keep coming after us.

 

How do you propose we put them in their place, nw?

[sh#t waffle]

For Neil:

 

[YOUTUBE]N2ICtCO8TCw[/YOUTUBE]

[SCOUSE TAPAS]

Neil G, what a great post, and I feel exactly the same as you do.

 

My concern is, as others have pointed out, that we are in a no win situation. We fight it, we are condoning racism, as determined by the hugely influential media in this country. We don't fight it, Luis' name is forever tarnished in this country at least, and I agree with you, this issue will not go away, like some others seem to think/hope/believe. It will keep rearing it's ugly head. Worst of all, Luis is vulnerable to further frivolous accusations of racial abuse, and he's got two more strikes before he is out so to speak. I can see why the club wanted to draw a line under it and Kenny's latent frustration was plain to see in his interviews. I am very disappointed at how the club dealt with this process legally, but I really believe they naively thought it would never end up here and believed that Luis would get a fair hearing. The report of course reveals that all along the process was designed to find him guilty.

 

I have been pondering writing a blog to take apart the huge tome the fa put out late on New Year's Eve, and perhaps I will, just to get the feelings of injustice off of my chest.

Luis is no saint on the football pitch, but I do believe that he does need someone (fans, other players around the world) to put his case forward. I see the Uruguayan player, Pereira, has made a good start.

Manchester United’s Patrice Evra faces international backlash - Sport Confidential - Football - Sport - People.co.uk

 

Hey thanks for posting that link.

 

I have been looking to find out how all this is being looked at by players in his home country.

 

Evra is going to need more than body armour when Uruguay play them.

[xerxes]

It doesn't have to be a load of impenetrable legal detail, it just has to set out the following key arguments:

 

1) Liverpool FC and its fans have stood by Luis Suarez not because we condone racism, but because we believe there's no evidence at all that he's guilty of what he’s accused of, and thus his reputation and that of the club have been unfairly damaged as a result.

 

2) The FA Commission's report was wholly unreliable, because it wasn't based on evidence, just one man’s word against another's. This is all the more unacceptable because the Commission actually said that the more serious the charge, the higher the standard of proof has to be.

 

3) The Commission was wrong to conclude that Evra was a more reliable witness than Suarez, because the inconsistencies in his testimony are bigger than those in Luis's. Here the club can focus on the major ones, particularly the "5 times" (Ferguson) vs "10 times" (Evra on Canal +) versions, and "he called me black / negro" (Evra's complaint to the ref) vs "he called me a nigger" (implied on Canal +, plus Nani's statement and the report's own finding – see paras. 123 and 125 of the report). There are others, but these are the two that jump out.

 

4) The Commission was also wrong to cite Evra's calm demeanour during the hearing as a reason for believing his word over Luis's, because he a) wasn’t the one being accused, b) spoke better English than Luis, c) already had experience of an FA investigative process, and d) had the benefit of watching the footage again when giving his testimony, unlike Luis. This is an obvious case of bias.

 

 

Neil, I am in no doubt that Luis has been wronged.

 

Unfortunately your points perpetuate the blind alley which some have been careering down.

 

1.Is simply wrong. He admitted to using language making reference to Evras colour in writing, and Comolli backed it up. It was an own goal.

 

2.Is wrong- se point 1.

 

3.The Tribunal is free to make a judgement on the reliability of evidence offered to it – that is what tribunals do.

 

4.See above regarding demeanour.

You explain:” As for the press's refusal to examine and present our side of the story, you say "for whatever reasons" as if it's a mystery, but it's really not. The reason the press haven't done this is because there's no story and no headline in it as things stand”

Perhaps the fact that no journalists were invited for briefings of our side of the story pre verdict and judgement is an alternative explanation? Perhaps the absence of one of the best media gurus in the world, our very own TW had something to do with it?

 

I am as aggrieved as anyone as to how this turns out. But I despair of those who pursue a failed course of action- and are then surprised by the results.

 

Where we were ( which should have been handled far better) has gone. We have to deal with where we are, now.

[ngogswilly]

Perhaps the fact that no journalists were invited for briefings of our side of the story pre verdict and judgement is an alternative explanation? Perhaps the absence of one of the best media gurus in the world, our very own TW had something to do with it?

 

 

In fairness I think Neil is suggesting that can still be done at least post verdict.

 

We can still put our side of things across if done correctly. Like he says, a press conference where we state our case clearly and concisely would help in a major way.

 

The media can ignore shots across the bow we make like the two statements we made which had no real details about the report in there. Fact is our failure to even make a bullet point list of all the problems with the report is just ridiculous considering its there for the taking.

 

It'd be hard for all the self rightous twats pillaring the club on a daily bais to argue against some of the inconsistencies and bias in that report. But it hasn't been put in front of them in a nice easy format for their pea sized brains to digest. Of course they'd still have their agendas but I have a funny feeling a few may fall a bit silent.

 

You're right though, we have to deal with where we are now. Luis clearing his name or at least proving he didn't do half the crazy shit Evra said he did may unfortunately have to be something he deals with privately, because the club probably has reached the point where we have to say enough is enough now and move on.

[Delmar]

I'm not sure what opening this up again in public would achieve. From the club's point of view, we should never have accepted the "verdict", and should have appealed, that was the chance, even though we knew that the game was rigged. That would have been doing the right thing. You do not start a fight, which we did in the press releases during the case and after the ruling, without being ready to finish it.

 

Secondly, and more importantly, the present situation is that as the club has decided its position (after having a different position), the only one to decide about further action is Luis Suarez himself. Before anyone starts with anything, they should try to see what he wants. It's all good and well to fight for the club when it is a question of the ownership, or generic issues like that, but here we are talking about a player, an individual, who may well want to leave this all alone and not be a figurehead of a campaign. If he does, though, we should go all out, no problem there.

 

Third point to think is the timing, before the ManU games? Not a good idea, we would be seen as aggressors again. After them? Maybe, but there's a good chance that other issues fill the newspapers at that stage.

[Major Tom]

In fairness I think Neil is suggesting that can still be done at least post verdict.

 

We can still put our side of things across if done correctly. Like he says, a press conference where we state our case clearly and concisely would help in a major way.

 

The media can ignore shots across the bow we make like the two statements we made which had no real details about the report in there. Fact is our failure to even make a bullet point list of all the problems with the report is just ridiculous considering its there for the taking.

 

It'd be hard for all the self rightous twats pillaring the club on a daily bais to argue against some of the inconsistencies and bias in that report. But it hasn't been put in front of them in a nice easy format for their pea sized brains to digest. Of course they'd still have their agendas but I have a funny feeling a few may fall a bit silent.

 

You're right though, we have to deal with where we are now. Luis clearing his name or at least proving he didn't do half the crazy shit Evra said he did may unfortunately have to be something he deals with privately, because the club probably has reached the point where we have to say enough is enough now and move on.

 

It is accepted by all sides that Suarez made reference to Evra's colour. Just what do you want to clarify to the press that you think will change their stance on this? You'll say 'Evra said Suarez called him 'nigger' 10 times but he only said 'negro' once". They'll go "so the fuck what? Suarez still made reference to Evra's colour." And then where do you go?

 

The press and whoever else may see the inconstancies in Evra's testimony but they see the reference to Evra's colour as racism, or at least racist abuse. And that is the crux of their stance and you'll have a tough time shifting their view from that. You are really best to move on. By dragging this out, we are only harming ourselves as fans and a a club. That's a fact.

[Trumo]

Delmar,

 

We didn't appeal because we were only allowed to appeal against the sentence, i.e. the ban and fine, not the verdict itself. The FA process was not allowed to be questioned and appealed against. Appealing against the sentence alone would have implied an acceptance of guilt and a plea for leniency. Reading the statements from the club, it is clear the club have not and will not "accept" the verdict and do not agree with the findings.

[ngogswilly]

It is accepted by all sides that Suarez made reference to Evra's colour. Just what do you want to clarify to the press that you think will change their stance on this? You'll say 'Evra said Suarez called him 'nigger' 10 times but he only said 'negro' once". They'll go "so the fuck what? Suarez still made reference to Evra's colour." And then where do you go?

 

The press and whoever else may see the inconstancies in Evra's testimony but they see the reference to Evra's colour as racism, or at least racist abuse. And that is the crux of their stance and you'll have a tough time shifting their view from that. You are really best to move on. By dragging this out, we are only harming ourselves as fans and a a club. That's a fact.

 

You're right Tom. They have their Agenda and they arn't going to shift from it. But getting the info out into the public domain at least means its there. No hiding from it. The press may try and twist it and set the agenda but they can't hide what we put out, if they did well then we are well and truly fucked as a society in general. The truth will set you free and all that shit ya know!

 

You're right though we really do have to move on, I just hope we as a fanbase and the club don't bow to pressures to capitulate and start doing as we're told by the media et al.

 

That will be the road to ruin for us altogether. Because we give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

[Delmar]

Delmar,

 

We didn't appeal because we were only allowed to appeal against the sentence, i.e. the ban and fine, not the verdict itself. The FA process was not allowed to be questioned and appealed against. Appealing against the sentence alone would have implied an acceptance of guilt and a plea for leniency. Reading the statements from the club, it is clear the club have not and will not "accept" the verdict and do not agree with the findings.

 

If that is the case, fine, then forget about my first point. I've probably read too many posts about this, and my understanding was different. This is copied from the TAW:

 

(vii) The appeal may only be allowed on one or more of the following grounds:

(a) The Regulatory Commission misinterpreted or failed to comply with the rules or*regulations relevant to its decision; and/or

(b) came to a decision to which no reasonable such body could have come; and/or

© the penalty, order or sanction imposed was excessive.

 

By accepting the ban, and insisting on the innocence in the statements, then having Suarez issue an apology, sort of, we've just muddled the case.

 

Anyway, I still believe that continuing with this should be Suarez's decision.

[Major Tom]

You're right Tom. They have their Agenda and they arn't going to shift from it. But getting the info out into the public domain at least means its there. No hiding from it. The press may try and twist it and set the agenda but they can't hide what we put out, if they did well then we are well and truly fucked as a society in general. The truth will set you free and all that shit ya know!

 

You're right though we really do have to move on, I just hope we as a fanbase and the club don't bow to pressures to capitulate and start doing as we're told by the media et al.

 

That will be the road to ruin for us altogether. Because we give them an inch, they'll take a mile.

 

They will forever insist they are right and you will forever insist you are. Never the twain shall meet. Don't agree they have an agenda, mind.

 

Best to move on and as absolutely nothing positive can come out of dragging this out, in my view.

[beejay]

I can't understand why we don't just publish all the evidence that was presented to the Commission.

 

Let everyone make their minds up based on that.

 

The Commission report selectively extracts the bits of evidence they needed to arrive at the verdict they wanted. We have alluded to the omissions in the report but that sounds like bad grace.

 

Publish and be damned.

[Original202]

Fsg are not going to fight this. The public appetite for it is not there and it would be commercial suicide. People need to accept that and move on. If not, things will get worse and not better.

 

Spot on, we need to move on.

 

A lot of the damage that has been done has been self inflicted in how we as a club handled the whole thing. The club has dug itself into a hole and by fighting all this further we can't dig our way out of it.

 

Suarez isn't a racist, but the more we protest against this the worse we make the situation. There are bigger - and far more winnable - injustices to be fought.

[mattyq]

Wow, good to see you back, Neil.

Next we'll have the Count posting his undead thoughts on the matter

[MLB]

The trouble we have now is that the more the club protests, the more we will be criticised for "sour grapes" or "not being tough on racism" or some other spurious shite. The story was framed and led in such a way that we are fighting a massive uphill battle. Clearly the FA have played the media game MUCH better than we did. My suspicion is that the story was initially drip fed to manc-friendly journos like Lipton and that tit at The Guardian and they had their stories ready to go when it broke. We can still change the conversation but we will need LFC-friendly journalists on our side and for the sane voices of black ex-pros (like Digger) to be heard.

[WaltonRed]

We did what Scousers do, we stuck together, its something the wider country can never ever get the head round and to them we're just being our typical bolshie selves and they're loving it cos they can have another go at us.

 

Fuck them

[xerxes]

Delmar,

 

We didn't appeal because we were only allowed to appeal against the sentence, i.e. the ban and fine, not the verdict itself. The FA process was not allowed to be questioned and appealed against. Appealing against the sentence alone would have implied an acceptance of guilt and a plea for leniency. Reading the statements from the club, it is clear the club have not and will not "accept" the verdict and do not agree with the findings.

 

This is not true.

 

I quoted before, and quote again, from the FA's own website the grounds on which an appeal could be made.You can appeal against the verdict.

 

399 (e)

 

(vii) The appeal may only be allowed on one or more of the following grounds:

(a) The Regulatory Commission misinterpreted or failed to comply with the rules or

regulations relevant to its decision; and/or

(b) came to a decision to which no reasonable such body could have come; and/or

© the penalty, order or sanction imposed was excessive.

 

Where this idea that Appealing against the sentence alone would have implied an acceptance of guilt and a plea for leniency is a mystery.

 

The Club has accepted the verdict, it has not appealed against it.

 

Our official response to this has been shambolic from start to finish.