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

[thechap]

I think a crucial mistake that's being made in this consideration of our responses is the idea that people are actually interested in the truth.

 

....

 

The problem with this fight is that we can't win it. We can surrender or we can fight and take the damage, which will be considerable. The side you take depends on your mentality; but it's not a fight of virtue that is being waged through the press. It is a fight with the press, and a fight against everybody who wants their sacrificial scapegoat, who are people like Piara Powar, Oliver Holt, the FA, Ferguson, and of course the great British public. There is not a man within that crowd for whom I hold respect and I would rather we damn them all and say our piece. Those who decide to listen will do so and those who ignore us should be pitied for their smallness. We are a proud club and we should not have to abdicate our spirit for the sake of pragmatism.

 

 

A fantastic post. Rousing, determined and inspiring. Well done, that man.

[thechap]

FWIW here is my opinion. I agree with those who have said that this is a battle that cannot be won in the press. They have all decided what they want the public to believe and I can't imagine any of them will, after having taken their 'Luis is guilty and the report is gospel' stance backtrack on that stance and now run a story of how the report is full of holes and bias.

 

The club, it seems, has been forbidden from further commenting on the case. I think the only weapon left is legal action by Luis against the papers that declared him racist. I don't see how he could possible lose because, on the balance of probabilities, he isn't.

[LFC64]

FWIW here is my opinion. I agree with those who have said that this is a battle that cannot be won in the press. They have all decided what they want the public to believe and I can't imagine any of them will, after having taken their 'Luis is guilty and the report is gospel' stance backtrack on that stance and now run a story of how the report is full of holes and bias.

 

The club, it seems, has been forbidden from further commenting on the case. I think the only weapon left is legal action by Luis against the papers that declared him racist. I don't see how he could possible lose because, on the balance of probabilities, he isn't.

 

Agree with all of above. As we've already established the media are hiding behind the big racism banner to take cheap personal shots at the club and Dalglish in particular. Their position is based on weak foundations however. In order to dismiss the glaring inconsistencies in the report and in Evra's account they have to have us all suspend belief and accept that the F.A. are untouchable, always right and beyond reproach when the entire footballing fraternity including the press know otherwise. They are taking this stance on this occasion alone because they are following the Press Association stance that showing balance and perspective equates to condoning racism and have left themselves nowhere to go on this issue. They areafraid to risk their own reputations amongst their peers because they don't want to stand out as 'the one who condones racism'.

When ever in the past has it been taboo to disagree with the F.A.?

For example:

 

QUOTE: Rooney, who was banned for kicking out at Montenegro's Miodrag Dzudovic in a qualifying match, had his three-game suspension reduced to two by Uefa on Thursday following a successful appeal from the FA.

 

“For them to get it from three to two, it opens up a can of worms,” Tottenham manager Redknapp told reporters.

 

“There will be clubs appealing against bans and they will want to know why they aren't getting it cut from three to two for similar situations.

 

“People will look at it and think, 'Hang on, the FA have gone and appealed against his red, why can't we?'“

 

Everton manager Moyes contrasted the Rooney situation with his experience of appeals to the FA.

 

“You should see us when we try to appeal - it's absolute murder,” he said.

 

“I've got to say, the times that I have been in front them, it's like a kangaroo court, you've got no chance.”

[xerxes]

FWIW here is my opinion. I agree with those who have said that this is a battle that cannot be won in the press. They have all decided what they want the public to believe and I can't imagine any of them will, after having taken their 'Luis is guilty and the report is gospel' stance backtrack on that stance and now run a story of how the report is full of holes and bias.

 

The club, it seems, has been forbidden from further commenting on the case. I think the only weapon left is legal action by Luis against the papers that declared him racist. I don't see how he could possible lose because, on the balance of probabilities, he isn't.

 

 

On your first para, we lost control of the story, and failed to grasp that the story had become the story, rather than the detail which started it all. There is, and will be an opportunity, for Luis and the Club. All stories have a news cycle. With no appeal, and sentence served, there will be plenty of opportunities for Luis to give “older and wiser” interviews, to tell of his work with the SA Boys Football project ,and smooth things over.

 

The Clubs has not been forbidden from discussing the case. It has agreed to be bound by the decisions of the Tribunal, which is standard, and smart. A campaign to review the treatment of race allegations by the FA in future would be sensible.

 

I do think that Luis has a case against The Mirror and its “Racist” headline – both the Tribunal and Evra explicitly says he was not. The problem he has is that it would be a defamation action. The adverse verdict, and our failure to appeal would not help, and the detail of the case would be played again, in public over several days drawing attention to the adverse allegations, as well as his defence. He may well reason that with the support of the club and our fans, a months mid season rest and a bit of summer sun is not the end of the world. I doubt if he reads the papers, and after his experience at Ajax, a bit of adverse opposition fan reaction will not bother him either. On balance, he may seek a retraction via the PCC, but I doubt if he will sue.

[Major Tom]

As we've already established the media are hiding behind the big racism banner to take cheap personal shots at the club and Dalglish in particular.

 

Why do you think this is? Have they got something against Dalglish do you think?

[LFC64]

Why do you think this is? Have they got something against Dalglish do you think?

 

"Probably"...

[Major Tom]

"Probably"...

 

You put forward a convincing case to back your claims.

 

A lawyer, no?

[zico]

I think a crucial mistake that's being made in this consideration of our responses is the idea that people are actually interested in the truth.

 

This smear campaign has never been about whether or not Suarez was guilty, or whether or not the club was right to support him, or even what the club's intentions were in doing so. It is simply about the club vs. the press; the club vs. the FA.

 

The press are not a body desperate for the truth. They print their stories and, if anybody fights against the image they put forward, they will attempt to crush them. They operate like a cartel. Suarez being found guilty was always what they would have wanted, because it is more scandalous, it sells more papers, and Suarez was already public enemy number one. The reason we're facing such an almighty shit-storm over it is because we refused to accept Luis' guilt, and we refused to offer the contrition that this kind of case (read: taboo) demands. In doing so, we essentially went to war with the tabloid press and we are, right now, in the midst of that war.

 

The idea that we can get the right statements or the right coverage out there misses the basic point that the people who we want to help us are the people we are at war with. They've already picked their sides in this battle. The theory of offering something that is 'good copy' exists, but my question would be: who is the market audience? Our club is despised all over the country and schadenfreude is the new opiate of the masses -- who is there out there who actually wants to believe there is any good in us?

 

Our best bet would be to take the FA to task over their disciplinary procedure and win. There is a scandal there. It is totally corrupt that the panel had Denis Smith, a close personal friend of Ferguson on it, and that they accepted all of Evra's inconsistencies unflinchingly whilst taking Suarez to task on his. That is the only way for us to fight our way out of it: offering a bigger sacrifice. Otherwise, it's just a case of taking it on the chin.

 

The idea, however, of just sitting back, putting out a few platitudes and letting it blow over is quite sickening to me. As I said, this is not about fighting for the truth, it is about standing up for ourselves against an organisation that is determined to crush us simply for not meekly bowing down and accepting their judgement. That this organisation is supposedly charged with keeping the people informed of the truths in our society makes it, in my opinion, the worst kind of tyrant, and the last sort we ought to show contrition to. On a matter of principle, I would rather we told them all to go fuck themselves. Let them smear us and denigrate us as much as they want, damn a coward's logic, and we can hold our heads up whatever the outcome. Any concessions we make are not to the sensitivity of the subject matter or the parties who are wronged, they are being made to the media who are armed to the teeth with the greatest sort of hypocrisy. We shouldn't let them extort tribute from us.

 

The problem with this fight is that we can't win it. We can surrender or we can fight and take the damage, which will be considerable. The side you take depends on your mentality; but it's not a fight of virtue that is being waged through the press. It is a fight with the press, and a fight against everybody who wants their sacrificial scapegoat, who are people like Piara Powar, Oliver Holt, the FA, Ferguson, and of course the great British public. There is not a man within that crowd for whom I hold respect and I would rather we damn them all and say our piece. Those who decide to listen will do so and those who ignore us should be pitied for their smallness. We are a proud club and we should not have to abdicate our spirit for the sake of pragmatism.

 

Very good points made here.....

[zico]

Nobody is fighting our corner and the media get's to form opinion that we as fans have no chance of matching...

 

No doubt has there been a smear campaign, and no doubt are they willing to continue until we submit unconditionally or Luis decides enough is enough....

 

I think the club have done themselves no favors by not appealing, and I feel sorry for Luis, as he is not ridiculously labelled a racist on the word of a previously convicted shit-stirring liar...

 

Intimidating the shit-stirring journos to such an extent that they can no longer attend Anfield might be a start, but it could also give them further ammunition...

 

It's a catch-22, we can't win....

 

Hope I never run into them in the streets, I might just take a swing....

[LFC64]

You put forward a convincing case to back your claims.

 

A lawyer, no?

 

No but I betcha I could make a great independant commission panelist

[beejay]

I'll say it again - why don't we just publish all the evidence presented to the Commission so people can make their own minds up?

 

Suarez's statement says it all for me - he said he felt powerless and that's exactly where we are at the moment. No-one gives a fuck about the truth, they are all perfectly happy with the idea that the dirty diving foreigner is a racist and all them scousers are playing the victim. We are partly in this mess because we lack influence in the corridors of power and this debacle shows up how isolated we have become.

 

We have to look to the long term and the action I would advocate is :

 

1. Appoint a high-powered establishment figure as Chairman to provide leadership and influence. His remit should also include inveigling himself onto the FA board. It's the only way to fight these bastards - from within. Ayre is not the right man for this job and neither are any of the Americans, it has to be a respected name from the top echelons of the industry such as Barwick, Broughton, Dein etc who can transcend club tribalism.

 

2. The new Chairman should promote reform of the FA disciplinary system. He will receive plenty of support from the other clubs - a 99.5% guilty record is more than you would expect from Iranian political trials and simply cannot be defended. They all know (well, all except Man Utd of course) that they could be next in line for a bad decision.

 

3. FSG have to invest some cash into the club. The FA think they can make an example of us because we are not a big hitter, we are no longer in Europe let alone in the Champions League. If they have a plan to make us winners again, they should accelerate it. We have to become one of the elite, fast.

 

4. We should be taking a leadership role within the European Club Association and start dictating to the FA.

 

5. The Suarez case should be taken as an example of bad practice. The rest of the world doesn't see this case in the same way as our blinkered media and the FA. We should be taking this up on the international stage so it can be seen in the same way as Bosman. The press will get on side with this eventually, once it suits them. It can be used as part of the fight against racism, to emphasise the cultural distinctions and make it a universal crusade rather than England v Rest of the World.

 

All of this will take time but the sooner FSG take action and set down some clear objectives starting with a new Chairman, the better.

[xerxes]

I'll say it again - why don't we just publish all the evidence presented to the Commission so people can make their own minds up?

 

Suarez's statement says it all for me - he said he felt powerless and that's exactly where we are at the moment. No-one gives a fuck about the truth, they are all perfectly happy with the idea that the dirty diving foreigner is a racist and all them scousers are playing the victim. We are partly in this mess because we lack influence in the corridors of power and this debacle shows up how isolated we have become.

 

We have to look to the long term and the action I would advocate is :

 

1. Appoint a high-powered establishment figure as Chairman to provide leadership and influence. His remit should also include inveigling himself onto the FA board. It's the only way to fight these bastards - from within. Ayre is not the right man for this job and neither are any of the Americans, it has to be a respected name from the top echelons of the industry such as Barwick, Broughton, Dein etc who can transcend club tribalism.

 

2. The new Chairman should promote reform of the FA disciplinary system. He will receive plenty of support from the other clubs - a 99.5% guilty record is more than you would expect from Iranian political trials and simply cannot be defended. They all know (well, all except Man Utd of course) that they could be next in line for a bad decision.

 

3. FSG have to invest some cash into the club. The FA think they can make an example of us because we are not a big hitter, we are no longer in Europe let alone in the Champions League. If they have a plan to make us winners again, they should accelerate it. We have to become one of the elite, fast.

 

4. We should be taking a leadership role within the European Club Association and start dictating to the FA.

 

5. The Suarez case should be taken as an example of bad practice. The rest of the world doesn't see this case in the same way as our blinkered media and the FA. We should be taking this up on the international stage so it can be seen in the same way as Bosman. The press will get on side with this eventually, once it suits them. It can be used as part of the fight against racism, to emphasise the cultural distinctions and make it a universal crusade rather than England v Rest of the World.

 

All of this will take time but the sooner FSG take action and set down some clear objectives starting with a new Chairman, the better.

 

 

A very good post Beejay.

 

On 1, I agree that we are paying the price for not having made a heavyweight appointment as CEO.

 

On2, Racism allegations which have a criminal dimension should not be heard by the FA. I agree that we should use that as a platform for wider reform.

 

On3, with us out of Europe and the FA Committees you are right to say our influence is waning and that success is critical to reverse that.

 

On 4, I agree, but regaining CL status is key.

 

On 5, see point 2.

 

You ask why don't we just publish all the evidence presented to the Commission so people can make their own minds up? The answer is that it was heard, along with all the other evidence, and that the evidence submitted by Luis and Comolli themselves was enough to find the charge proven.

[piscinin]

I agree with a lot of that beejay. Whatever we do we just have to be ruthless. It's the only language they understand. For years now Ferguson has been creating hot potatoes, lobbing them at the FA and reaping the rewards of their fear and incompetence. We need to start doing the same too. It's just not a level playing field otherwise.

[piscinin]

You ask why don't we just publish all the evidence presented to the Commission so people can make their own minds up? The answer is that it was heard, along with all the other evidence, and that the evidence submitted by Luis and Comolli themselves was enough to find the charge proven.

 

You have to remember that charge was proven only once you decided whose version of the story to believe. If you set out to prove Evra was lying you could very easily have done so.

 

If Suarez had been found guilty of using negro once, I would agree with you, but he wasn't. He was found guilty of using it several times over. So while it's true he could have been convicted merely on the basis of his and Comoli's testimony (or even just his own). He wasn't was he.

 

That distinction is why the contents needs to come out. Although it will of course be pointless re:confirmation bias, apathy, narrative too complicated to fit into average fan's attention span, playing into hands of those who want to portray us as racist, etc.

[xerxes]

You have to remember that charge was proven only once you decided whose version of the story to believe. If you set out to prove Evra was lying you could very easily have done so.

 

If Suarez had been found guilty of using negro once, I would agree with you, but he wasn't. He was found guilty of using it several times over. So while it's true he could have been convicted merely on the basis of his and Comoli's testimony (or even just his own). He wasn't was he.

 

That distinction is why the contents needs to come out. Although it will of course be pointless re:confirmation bias, apathy, narrative too complicated to fit into average fan's attention span, playing into hands of those who want to portray us as racist, etc.

 

Fair comment.

 

I agree that the degree of offence was worsened by what was accepted by the tribunal, but which was uncorroborated.

[piscinin]

Fair comment.

 

I agree that the degree of offence was worsened by what was accepted by the tribunal, but which was uncorroborated.

 

See this is the crux of the issue for me. Given all we know now, I think it's clear to see that the report should have been 2 pages long and said. All hearsay except an admittance of using negro. Therefore he's guilty. x game ban. If that had happened there would be I think a grudging acceptance. Our game vs. Manure would not be a powder-keg, we would not be sporting quite so large a chip.

 

But no, the FA in it's infinite incompetence, had to be so daft as to stack the deck so heavily in it's own favour that it's completely obvious and contributed to making a mountain out of this molehill as much as if not more than the guys who embellished the accusation, or the incompetents we employed to defend them.

[xerxes]

See this is the crux of the issue for me. Given all we know now, I think it's clear to see that the report should have been 2 pages long and said. All hearsay except an admittance of using negro. Therefore he's guilty. x game ban. If that had happened there would be I think a grudging acceptance. Our game vs. Manure would not be a powder-keg, we would not be sporting quite so large a chip.

 

But no, the FA in it's infinite incompetence, had to be so daft as to stack the deck so heavily in it's own favour that it's completely obvious and contributed to making a mountain out of this molehill as much as if not more than the guys who embellished the accusation, or the incompetents we employed to defend them.

 

Well put.

[beejay]

See this is the crux of the issue for me. Given all we know now, I think it's clear to see that the report should have been 2 pages long and said. All hearsay except an admittance of using negro. Therefore he's guilty. x game ban. If that had happened there would be I think a grudging acceptance. Our game vs. Manure would not be a powder-keg, we would not be sporting quite so large a chip.

 

But no, the FA in it's infinite incompetence, had to be so daft as to stack the deck so heavily in it's own favour that it's completely obvious and contributed to making a mountain out of this molehill as much as if not more than the guys who embellished the accusation, or the incompetents we employed to defend them.

 

I wonder if our people were aware that 99.5% of the charges brought by the FA in the last 12 months resulted in guilty verdicts. If not, they bloody well should have done. If so, they should have known the cards were stacked against us and decided on damage limitation.

 

Our problem is that we are too nice and too honest. FSG have to become much more hard headed and start to take the tough decisions. They have had their honeymoon period of reflection while they understand how the system works and they need to get past that learning curve and develop a clear strategy.

 

We are drifting at the moment, taken wherever the wind blows us. We have no real idea of where FSG stand on investment into the club either in terms of confirmed plans for a new stadium; effective off-pitch leadership; or team building.

[LFC64]

See this is the crux of the issue for me. Given all we know now, I think it's clear to see that the report should have been 2 pages long and said. All hearsay except an admittance of using negro. Therefore he's guilty. x game ban. If that had happened there would be I think a grudging acceptance. Our game vs. Manure would not be a powder-keg, we would not be sporting quite so large a chip.

 

But no, the FA in it's infinite incompetence, had to be so daft as to stack the deck so heavily in it's own favour that it's completely obvious and contributed to making a mountain out of this molehill as much as if not more than the guys who embellished the accusation, or the incompetents we employed to defend them.

 

Think you're right. The vitriol at the United game will inevitably be interpreted by the press as an ugly manifestation of racism from our side and will be partly excused as 'understandable although not to be condoned' from the United end.

I do agree this fixture would be far less incendiary if the report had stopped at 'making reference to colour' thereby technically contravening F.A rules (whether anyone agrees it was an offence or not). They could have got out of it this way by implying their hands were tied due to the wording of the F.A rules. They would still have sent their 'message to the wider world'. The club would have still have been able to disagree with the verdict and make their point about lack of intent and cultural intolerance without having to word the statement so strongly and adpot what is being perceived by many as an obstinate and belligerent stance.

I'd have argued all day about it myself since personally it would still be the wrong conclusion. But they had to go much further than that to appear vindicated.

It would still be a 'powder keg' situation but it has been compounded by the F.A's usual incompetence and unfortunately I have to agree the club has not defended it's own corner well.

[piscinin]

I wonder if our people were aware that 99.5% of the charges brought by the FA in the last 12 months resulted in guilty verdicts. If not, they bloody well should have done. If so, they should have known the cards were stacked against us and decided on damage limitation.

 

Hindsight is a wonderful thing isn't it. Only the other day I was calling our lawyer a wanker because he was making noises about being hamstrung by the fact we insisted on pleading not guilty. Well well, from where we are standing now, it seems like he might not have been such a useless wanker after all!

 

Our problem is that we are too nice and too honest. FSG have to become much more hard headed and start to take the tough decisions. They have had their honeymoon period of reflection while they understand how the system works and they need to get past that learning curve and develop a clear strategy.

 

Agree. We need to be ruthless. Kenny wants to slam the refs, but has to ask permission of the owners. Ferguson gets done for slamming refs, so just moves on to undermining opposition players instead (Torres, Suarez, Kompany).

 

We are drifting at the moment, taken wherever the wind blows us. We have no real idea of where FSG stand on investment into the club either in terms of confirmed plans for a new stadium; effective off-pitch leadership; or team building.

 

Yeah, it does feel that way when you put it like that.

[FanchesterCity]

The problem you have (ironically) is of prejudice...

 

1) Suarez, generally speaking is perceived to be an irritating type of player. This works against him in ANY incident (same for Bellamy / Barton etc). It's unfair, but it's a reality.

 

2) Racism is a serious 'taboo' and whilst it exists on the terraces of every club, and almost certainly on the pitch too, it's simply something everybody panics about when mentioned. Folks scared about what words are acceptable (coloured vs black etc), and the whole situation's a nightmare. The FA get super sensitive, the press jump on it, the fans jump on it.

 

3) The ULTIMATE fact is... two players exchanged words and we don't know what was said. There's disagreement between the two accounts and most independent / neutral fans see that for what it is... one guy's word against another. Pure and simple.

 

4) The report (yes I've read it) then attempts to say "OK, it's one guy vs another, so lets look at the circumstantial evidence and the likely probabilities'. They make a fair case for Suarez's guilt. I know this will upset many of you, but you mustn't see it as a jibe... it's not. It's simply saying they make a fair case for it. What would you expect from a document detailing WHY they found him guilty? it's not going to be a flimsy case that is easily broken. Yes you CAN make a case for it being wrong, but the document itself does what it set out to do (rightly or wrongly) - it makes a decent case.

 

This is all that the watching world really have to go on, and have basically made their minds up on and settled on.

The ONLY way Liverpool can challenge it now is to come up with serious new evidence. Arguing on the already known and assumed elements isn't going to help.

 

Is it an injustice? I don't know - it could well be.

 

If you've been stitched up, you've been stitched up fairly well. That doesn't change the fact that to prove innocence you'll need to perform a minor miracle.

 

Sometimes, I suppose you just have to say "we've been shafted" (if that's what you believe) and move on. It's not nice, it's not fair, but you have to.

 

Imagine you've been burgled. It's an AWFUL feeling, it truly hurts and it's wrong, but deep down you know you'll not get your stuff back. You move on, and eventually the bitter taste in your mouth fades. You never forget, but you do come out the other side.

 

It's a much better option than spending the rest of your days trying to figure out who did it and why etc.

 

I hope the above is taken in a good spirit and NOT seen as 'Liverpool are wrong'. I don't who was telling the truth. I'm not judging on the case... merely commenting on what I believe to be the reality of the aftermath.

[Guest TK-421]

The problem you have (ironically) is of prejudice...

 

1) Suarez, generally speaking is perceived to be an irritating type of player. This works against him in ANY incident (same for Bellamy / Barton etc). It's unfair, but it's a reality.

 

2) Racism is a serious 'taboo' and whilst it exists on the terraces of every club, and almost certainly on the pitch too, it's simply something everybody panics about when mentioned. Folks scared about what words are acceptable (coloured vs black etc), and the whole situation's a nightmare. The FA get super sensitive, the press jump on it, the fans jump on it.

 

3) The ULTIMATE fact is... two players exchanged words and we don't know what was said. There's disagreement between the two accounts and most independent / neutral fans see that for what it is... one guy's word against another. Pure and simple.

 

4) The report (yes I've read it) then attempts to say "OK, it's one guy vs another, so lets look at the circumstantial evidence and the likely probabilities'. They make a fair case for Suarez's guilt. I know this will upset many of you, but you mustn't see it as a jibe... it's not. It's simply saying they make a fair case for it. What would you expect from a document detailing WHY they found him guilty? it's not going to be a flimsy case that is easily broken. Yes you CAN make a case for it being wrong, but the document itself does what it set out to do (rightly or wrongly) - it makes a decent case.

 

This is all that the watching world really have to go on, and have basically made their minds up on and settled on.

The ONLY way Liverpool can challenge it now is to come up with serious new evidence. Arguing on the already known and assumed elements isn't going to help.

 

Is it an injustice? I don't know - it could well be.

 

If you've been stitched up, you've been stitched up fairly well. That doesn't change the fact that to prove innocence you'll need to perform a minor miracle.

 

Sometimes, I suppose you just have to say "we've been shafted" (if that's what you believe) and move on. It's not nice, it's not fair, but you have to.

 

Imagine you've been burgled. It's an AWFUL feeling, it truly hurts and it's wrong, but deep down you know you'll not get your stuff back. You move on, and eventually the bitter taste in your mouth fades. You never forget, but you do come out the other side.

 

It's a much better option than spending the rest of your days trying to figure out who did it and why etc.

 

I hope the above is taken in a good spirit and NOT seen as 'Liverpool are wrong'. I don't who was telling the truth. I'm not judging on the case... merely commenting on what I believe to be the reality of the aftermath.

 

Great to get an outsider's view on this and I agree with your thoughts entirely.

 

I fear you'll get a backlash for point number 4 as the majority here think there was no case against Suarez, some go as far as to say there wasn't even any evidence (palpably untrue).

 

Welcome to the forum.

[piscinin]

Great to get an outsider's view on this and I agree with your thoughts entirely.

 

I fear you'll get a backlash for point number 4 as the majority here think there was no case against Suarez, some go as far as to say there wasn't even any evidence (palpably untrue).

 

Welcome to the forum.

 

The unease that most who have thought this through feel, if not always articulated clearly, comes down to the fact that the case that existed and the case that was "proven" were two entirely different cases. One was sustainable and the other a very obvious exercise in evidential choreography.

[FanchesterCity]

Yeah, it's not worded as well as it should be.

 

What I'm trying to say is...

 

IF they believe Suarez is guilty (and they do), then the legal document to state their case isn't going to be a total shambles.

If someone's going to 'frame' you, the least they'll do is make a fair job of it!... that's what I'm trying to say. And in my opinion, they have done a fair job of it.

 

IF they'd gone with Suarez telling the truth and Evra lying, they would have made a document look as convincing for Suarez.

 

It's not a watertight document, but it never could be given the circumstances of the event, but it's convincing enough to need a significant level of new evidence to get it overturned. Pointing out a few holes in the document isn't going to be enough.

[FanchesterCity]

The unease that most who have thought this through feel, if not always articulated clearly, comes down to the fact that the case that existed and the case that was "proven" were two entirely different cases. One was sustainable and the other a very obvious exercise in evidential choreography.

 

Precisely my point in point 4... the report, by it's very nature is going to make a convincing case to justify their conclusion. It's hardly going to be a doddle to rip to shreds, even if there are holes/issues.

 

If you believe it's a stitch up, then nobody can be surprised they've done a decent job of it! They'd have to.