Jump to content

Suarez found guilty of racially abusing evra

Guest petercrotch

By Guest petercrotch
in Sports Room

 Share

Recommended Posts

  • Replies 704
  • Created
  • Last Reply

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Top Posters In This Topic

Popular Days

Popular Posts

MEIRELES.
MEIRELES.

8 Match ban for assault. Sqeezing hand too tight.

Mame Biram Diouf
Mame Biram Diouf

YOU YOU MAD?

DRC
DRC

Currently doing the rounds..

Posted

RT @Daryl_Conning: Patrice Evra is a dirty fatnigger! Hope he dies of aids like his ancestors #slave

West Midlands Police

@Daryl_Conning Your comments constitute an offence under the Public Order Act.We have received a complaint & advised them how to report it

:rofl:

you know his heart dropped when he read that tweet, scurrying to delete his account. :lol:

silly c*nt.

  • Upvote 3
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kompressor Newbie

Kompressor

Posted
Posted

I beg everyone stop talking about what should be happening with Terry in the press, if hopefully when he's found guilty, his punishment will make Suarez's look like half an hour detention. As the case is not over yet, and as it's a criminal proceeding, the press and everyone else are barred in what the can an can not say.

Why do people have problems understanding this,

The exact same applies to the idiots who are always asking, "where's the taxi driver who was driving Mark Duggan"

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Kompressor Newbie

Kompressor

Posted
Posted

for those wanting an intelligent Liverpool's fan reaction, here it is.

made by one of the admins at RAWK.

Ignore the part about previous unfounded allegations, as obviously this particular persons intelligence doesn't stretch that far.

Suarez – A Reaction

Posted on December 21, 2011 by admin

Well, well, well – a guilty verdict and a whopping 8 match ban. I really didn’t see that coming on the 15th October when, after I thought Liverpool slightly shaded a 1-1 draw with Man United, the Sky coverage post-match started to pick and run with a story claiming Suarez racially abused Patrice Evra.

“As a Liverpool FC fan this is a devastating outcome but ultimately some things are more important than club loyalty.”

On first hearing this story I dismissed it pretty quickly because Patrice Evra is a) a bit of nutter and
B)
in the confrontational Neviller-mould c) has past form for unfounded allegations and finally d) with no physical evidence and one man’s word against another the claim would fizzle out as un-provable. Consequently, I was genuinely amazed when on the 17th November, Luis Suarez was officially charged by the FA with, “(making) an abusive….reference to the ethnic origin and/or colour and/or race of Patrice Evra.”

My first reaction was that there had to be a smoking gun – some damning piece of evidence that wasn’t yet in the public domain. Was there an incriminating John Terry-esque video clip? Had the referee actually heard something? I hadn’t heard anything from the Liverpool end so I was straight onto @Us_Monster for a Man Utd perspective but there was nothing that end as well. The conclusion that I came to was that the FA had made a huge mistake and opened a gargantuan can of worms. It seemed that they had started a policy of charging people based on hearsay and allegation alone. A policy that would encourage petty rivalries and recriminations, produce countless official charges but never any convictions.

From a selfish, Liverpool FC point of view I had absolutely no worries. There was no smoking gun evidence so the only way a charge would be coming Suarez’s way would be if he broke down Colonel Nathan R. Jessop style from A Few Good Men while some FA punk shouted ‘I want the truth’ at him!

Then my confidence was shattered last week when reports started to appear that Suarez had admitted to using the word ‘negro’ or some close derivation of it! Knights of Columbus, that hurt! The next 3 paragraphs are based on these reports being accurate obviously if they are materially not I reserve the right to change my conclusion!

‘I only said it once’

One pillar of Suarez’s reported defence and reason for entering a guilty plea was that he only said it once. To the first part of the defence and the amount of usage of the word is only relevant in determining the severity of the sanction not in the determination of guilt. If he used it hundred, ten or once – then he’s guilty. However, the frequency of usage should be taken into account in the punishment of this guilt. A ubiquitous use should attract a greater punishment than a one off usage.

‘It’s not offensive in Montevideo’

To the second part of the reported defence – the ‘cultural difference’ i.e. what’s inoffensive in Uruguay is offensive in England. My major rebuttal of this is, is that ignorance of the law is no defence. Imagine a moron bombs down your local high street at 40 m.p.h. and knocks down a kills a child crossing the road who he’d have missed if he was going at 30 m.p.h. Said moron tells the police that he thought that as there was no lamp posts it meant it was a 40 m.p.h. limit. The moron thought he was doing nothing illegal – does this make him innocent? No, however it potentially makes him ‘less’ guilty and the level of intent / awareness should be taken into account when determining the penalty for the crime. In the same way that if you kill somebody it can be classed as ‘Involuntary manslaughter’ i.e. you didn’t mean to do it and you would expect to serve less time if it was classed as ‘Murder’ i.e. you meant to do it.

‘I’m not a racist’

Liverpool FC’s fierce response to the verdict mentions Suarez mixed race heritage and quotes Evra’s assertion that he doesn’t believe Suarez is a racist. Again, this is not a defence of the crime because Suarez hasn’t been charged with being a racist but only with using a racist term. In the immediate aftermath of the alleged incident John Barnes intelligently and pertinently mentioned that racists don’t necessarily say racist things, and people who say racist things aren’t necessarily racists. Again I would take this into account in deciding the punishment. A racist using racist terms should be punished more heavily than a person using it ignorant of its meaning.

To conclude (again based on the confirmed use of the racist word) then

Patrice Evra was absolutely right and, I would go as far to say, duty bound to report to the FA

Based on Evra’s allegation the FA was absolutely right to start an investigation

If Suarez’s written submission contained an admission of using a close derivation of a recognised racist term then the FA were absolutely right to charge him and find him guilty

After determining guilt we then have to approach the more problematic issue of ‘valuing’ the crime, the appropriate method and level of punishment.

Crime ‘value’

You will no doubt have read and heard many people giving their opinion of racism so apologies for again repeating the obvious but racism (and racist terms) is odious, totally repugnant and has no place in any society. In terms of things to say I don’t think there would be anything spoken that could be more disgusting (there are, of course, things of equal despicability) and attracting the harshest of punishments.

Punishment Method

Fining millionaire footballers, for any discretion, is pointless so I am totally supportive that if a footballer is found guilty then you need to hit them where it hurts i.e. game suspension.

Punishment Level

I have taken the above alleged and confirmed defences into account but the abhorrent nature of the alleged term used and its underlying message I have to agree with the severity that the FA has chosen. I do think there is a bit of ‘shock and awe’ involved in the scale of the penalty but I think that is befitting the crime and wholly appropriate and necessary.

As a Liverpool FC fan this is a devastating outcome but ultimately some things are more important than club loyalty.

@forcefrewgood

Link to comment
Share on other sites
FANTA Newbie

FANTA

Posted
Posted

very good article, no different to what fans all over have been saying, shame most of it will fall on deaf ears

Tony Evans

Football Editor

December 27 2011 12:01AM

I don’t know much about South American culture and slang. I do know, however, a little about the mechanics of confrontation. Even at Sunday League level, I’ve had verbal spats and faced down opposition players from Everton Valley to East Los Angeles. As a fan, I’ve exchanged insults — and worse — with rival supporters from Trafford Park to the Tiber.

That’s just the football-related stuff. In real life, I’ve been in the middle of riots, squared up to police on picket lines and fought fascist bully-boys with bare knuckles.

What have I learnt? Not much, but enough to know that if I’m having a row with a black man and I make a reference to his colour, he’s going to think it’s a racist slur.

Luis Suárez, Liverpool Football Club and legions of their fans seem bewildered that the word negrito directed at a black man in the course of an argument would lead the individual concerned to assume that he had been racially abused.

Nobody would deny that the exchange between Suárez and Patrice Evra was acrimonious. Nobody would deny that the word negrito makes reference to blackness. So where are Suárez’s grounds for defence?

Well, the linguistic experts tell us that negrito is not a pejorative term. In fact, it appears that it is a friendly phrase in Hispanic culture. In one defence of the Liverpool striker, the writer talked of hearing a young, white woman with a dark complexion being referred to by the same term during a business transaction in Buenos Aires.

The problem with this is that Evra is not a young white woman, nor is he Hispanic. He is a short, black Frenchman, who, from his perspective, appears to have been called something akin to “little black boy” by someone he was having a row with. Suárez, quite clearly, was not being genial. He was winding up Evra on the pitch in the heat of a Liverpool v Manchester United game. No wonder the defender felt racially abused.

In September, a mere handful of Liverpool fans would have even heard the term negrito. Now they are experts in the semantics of Hispanic slang, describing in detail how it is a term of affection. Well, if Suárez was being affectionate to a United player during a game, the club should crack down on him. An eight-game ban? Surely that should be a sackable offence?

There are so many words in English, French and Spanish that can be used in a quarrel that referencing colour in any way seems at best ill-advised and at worst racist. Either way it’s bloody stupid.

Suárez may not have had any racist intent but the Hispanic subtleties were lost on Evra. They’d be lost on most in Britain.

So this unedifying spat continues with Liverpool supporters — almost to a man — behind Suárez.

It is embarrassing. Is it not possible for Liverpool fans to have some empathy with Evra? To see that he felt racially abused? Seemingly not in the pathetically tribal world of football, where basic decencies are thrown out the window and the “my club right or wrong” ethic prevails.

If it were all a cultural misunderstanding, why didn’t Liverpool nip it in the bud in October? It may be me, but once the word negrito cropped up I winced. I may be culturally naive, but it sounded ugly. It would sound worse to a black man.

The club should have put out a statement that read something like this: “Patrice Evra has alleged that Luis Suárez made racist remarks to him during the game at Anfield. Suárez denies this emphatically but has come to realise that it was easy for Evra to misunderstand the nuances of the Spanish phrase used and believe that he had been racially abused. Suárez would like to apologise unreservedly for any upset caused and make clear that he is against racism and discrimination in all its forms. It was a poor choice of words in the context but any student of South American culture will explain it has no racial overtones. In future, Liverpool Football Club will issue its players with a set of guidelines as to what is acceptable and not acceptable.”

Effectively, just say sorry, I didn’t mean that, I feel a bit stupid now.

Suárez is not a racist but he has been a fool. The trick is not to compound foolishness.

Instead, Liverpool put out a statement that threw the blame back at Evra, then gave us the risible sight of Suárez warming up at the DW Stadium before the Wigan Athletic match in a T-shirt supporting himself.

Pointing the finger at Evra is shameful. It can only harden the FA’s determination to make its point. And despite the more rabid conspiracy theorists, this is a battle that the FA would rather not have.

This situation — along with the John Terry/Anton Ferdinand incident — has brought the game into disrepute and exposed racial fault lines in football and society that most thought had been buried forever. One look at the abuse that Stan Collymore — a former Liverpool forward — has been receiving shows that. Sadly, it looks like decency has been buried instead.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
JOHN DOE Newbie

JOHN DOE

Posted
Posted
The club should have put out a statement that read something like this: “Patrice Evra has alleged that Luis Suárez made racist remarks to him during the game at Anfield. Suárez denies this emphatically but has come to realise that it was easy for Evra to misunderstand the nuances of the Spanish phrase used and believe that he had been racially abused. Suárez would like to apologise unreservedly for any upset caused and make clear that he is against racism and discrimination in all its forms. It was a poor choice of words in the context but any student of South American culture will explain it has no racial overtones. In future, Liverpool Football Club will issue its players with a set of guidelines as to what is acceptable and not acceptable.”

real.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Young £ Newbie

Young £

Posted
Posted

To be honest is this not a PR disaster?

Kenny is a walking PR disaster. It was pretty much always the case, but he got away with it early in his management career because he was invariably winning.

The other person who comes out of this fairly poorly is the owner. There are two ways he could have contained this PR nightmare, either step in himself early and take the path of least resistance - dampen down the bad news with an apology, it was all a cultural misunderstanding thing - and hardly anyone would even be talking about it now. Meanwhile you quietly appeal the length of the ban and the FA shortens it because you have shown penitence for the crime and are sending out the right signal.

If you do not want to get involved in this personally then you make sure you put in place a senior management structure at the club to handle it for you. A structure that has a strong communications head and a manager with strict instructions that any actions or comments he makes on this subject have to be signed off by the PR guy.

Dalglish is doing what he is doing undoubtedly to try and create a siege mentality and keep his team close in spirit and deed. But what is good for one part of a vast organisation like Liverpool is not necessarily good for the rest of it. The club's image and reputation is taking a battering because there are no senior people there who seem to have the power or remit to argue their own corners in the face of the scattershot approach of Dalglish.

I cannot imagine any one person would have this amount of scope within their job definitions to cause this much trouble at any of Henry's other sporting entities, I struggle to imagine why he permits this to happen at Liverpool.

Too much that seems to have happened at the club over the past year has been rather knee jerk, whether some of the ridiculous, panicky transfer deals or this sort of pandering to the baser instincts of the more rabid elements of the support. Good owners need to stand aloof from populist gestures, Henry seems to be far too acquiescent in the poor decision making made by the people he is trusting to run the club. I do not know if this is a competence issue or a currying favour one, either way I am worried.

The owner doesn't have the first clue of what he is doing when it comes to football. NESV bought Liverpool because someone told them they could buy one of the most widely supported sports franchises in the world for £200 million. They jumped at it. The glazers were looking for over 10 times as much for man utd. £200 million was cheap. There was however a couple of reasons as to why this storied franchise was available so cheaply.

The problem is that they don't know anything at all about football. They didn't realise what a mess Benitez had made of the club, with the assistance of H&G. they didn't know how incredibly shit most of the players were when they took over.

They didn't realise how much fucking money these players were on. They didn't realise how badly structured the squad was, they didn't realise how long their contracts were. They were only dimly aware of how bad the clubs underlying financial position was, and how costs were exploding as income fell.

They had some lovely little plans for a transfer guru to scour Europe for top players at fantastic prices, with a coach at the cutting edge of management, using the most modern of methods to weld the team into a winning machine.

However, NESV didn't realise that all of their plans were going to be fucked straight out the window, because King Kenny wanted the job, and let it be known to the world at large through his mates who were all in the media and saying what a great manager he would be.

NESV looked at their fans in near open revolt against their manager, and saw they were chanting for the return of a man who hadn't had any real involvement in football since he disgraced himself at Celtic and Newcastle, and they just buckled.

Out went any notion of young coaches with inventive tactics, out went clever purchases, in came insanely expensive players of unproven top level pedigree, but proven behavioural problems, at galactico prices. All rational economic planning went out the window as they "overspent to show the fans that they were prepared to spend big." before scouring the North East for unbelievably bad value.

NESV have little or no leverage over Dalglish. If they sacked him tomorrow they could never set foot in their own stadium again and would have to sell the club. KK can do whatever he wants, and unfortunately, it appears that he only seems to be interested in pissing and shitting all over his own reputation.

Whether it be buying terrible players, or wasting obscene amounts of money, or making an unbelievably awful mess of handling this Suarez case, or even buying the crazy uncontrollable c*nt in the first place.

Suarez, Carroll, Downing and Henderson are enormous catastrophic club-crushing blunders. any other football manager who had made the catalogue of horrendous errors that Dalglish has made over the last 12 months would have been not only fired, but sued for the damage he's done to NESV's economic interests.

But ultimately there is nothing that they can do about it, other than wait until he realises that his best managerial days were under Thatcher, and hope that he fucks off back to the 19th hole with the MOTD pundits, to tell off-colour stories about the good old days.

NESV can then look at their falling income, escalating costs, rising losses, and try and rebuild again, in the knowledge that Liverpool have officially replaced nNewcastle as the most criminally mismanaged club in england. Pretty soon Liverpool fans are going to start every season hoping for a good run at a Europa league spot, and if one of the CL clubs wins the League cup, maybe we'll get it.

I know many will be very angry at what I have written but it's the truth and we all know it.

  • Upvote 1
Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afroman Newbie

Afroman

Posted
Posted

Suarez banned for 1 game and fined 20k for the Fulham game :lol:

Man is basically missing 9 games now if he doesn't appeal

Liverpool are fucked

wait.. Is this a different ban to the first?

Or is this the first reduced to one match ban?

I only just saw the banner on the news @ work.

Link to comment
Share on other sites
DRC Newbie

DRC

Posted
Posted

Suarez banned for 1 game and fined 20k for the Fulham game :lol:

Man is basically missing 9 games now if he doesn't appeal

Liverpool are fucked

wait.. Is this a different ban to the first?

Or is this the first reduced to one match ban?

I only just saw the banner on the news @ work.

different ban

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Afroman Newbie

Afroman

Posted
Posted

Suarez banned for 1 game and fined 20k for the Fulham game :lol:

Man is basically missing 9 games now if he doesn't appeal

Liverpool are fucked

wait.. Is this a different ban to the first?

Or is this the first reduced to one match ban?

I only just saw the banner on the news @ work.

different ban

nice

Link to comment
Share on other sites
Guest
This topic is now closed to further replies.
 Share
Go to topic listing
×
×
  • Create New...