Suarez found guilty of racially abusing evra

[Kompressor]

I've said it before, a carefully worded, Heartfelt statement once the accusation had been made wouldve taken a lot of heat of the situation.

explanation by Suarez of why what he said was not filled with any racial descrimubation an apology in regards to any offence that may have been caused and a reiteration that no racial offence was made.

Then the club should've come out and said "we take racism very seriously here and for years have strived to erradict it from our game, Luis Suarez is not a racist and what has happened here is a breakdown in cultural differences,

We will be attempting to contact Manchester United and Patrice Evra in an attempt to explain Luis' side of things and hopefully come to a positive conclusion there.

On our own part, we will sit down with Luis and explain why the word he used could be seen to cause offence here and why it's different to how it is used in his Native Uraguay,

This simple and short statement would've taken a lot of heat from the saga.

What we got only served to add more gas to it.

[Flojo]

I've said it before, a carefully worded, Heartfelt statement once the accusation had been made wouldve taken a lot of heat of the situation.

explanation of why what he said was not filled with any racial descrimubation an apology in regards to any offence that may have been caused and a reiteration that no racial offence was made.

Then the club should've come out and said "we take racism very seriously here and for years have strived to erradict it from our game, Luis Suarez is not a racist and what has happened here is a breakdown in cultural differences,

We will be attempting to contact Manchester United and Patrice Evra in an attempt to explain Luis' side of things and hopefully come to a positive conclusion there.

On our own part, we will sit down with Luis and explain why the word he used could be seen to cause offence here and why it's different to how it is used in his Native Uraguay,

This simple and short statement would've taken a lot of heat from the saga.

What we got only served to add more gas to it.

You keep ignoring the fact that Ferguson went to the ref and told him Suarez had called him a black blackie 'nigger 5 times' right after the game, diffusing the situation was out the window because Ferguson had just poured a gallon of petrol on it.

Also

The FA rules state that references to colour, heritage, religious belief and nationality are against the rules and that's fair enough. The problem is that the linguistic expert determined that it isn't a term reserved for black people but let's ignore that and say he did refer to his skin colour and even dismiss the context of it.

How can Suarez be banned for referring to Evra's skin colour but Evra isn't banned for referring to Suarez' south american heritage when they come under the same rule?

I'm unable to be objective and see things from the point of the FA so could you tell me how that makes sense please.

[Kompressor]

Ok cool.

The reaction of your club, I.e the sheer indifference shown from the start, didn't make anything worse. And it was never possible to try to improve things.

I'm officially done with this debate now, as it's started to enter the ridiculous stakes ages ago, now it's something else completely.

I admire your blind support fir the club despite the total PR disaster it has been from the Anfield end from start to finish,

It'd been interesting to see the reaction had it been Roy Hodgson making the comments Dalgliesh has made,

Your defence of Suarez is whatever as there's room for interpretation on both sides, your support for the clubs handling of it is total stupidity tbh,

[Flojo]

You say i'm blind but you don't acknowledge that this situation was made worse largely because your manager and player lied. It's in the report.

You keep mentioning the reaction but ignore the reaction you're talking about was after Ferguson made it a million times worse by incorrectly saying he called him a nigger. It's difficult to not be incensed when it's obvious someone is doing their best to wrongly have you punished.

Yes it was a PR disaster but PR for the most part is about perception, I'm more interested in what actually happened and having read the report I've formed an educated opinion.

I've pointed out why it was a sham hearing and given reasoning why. I've answered every question people have asked with answers based on what's in the report but when I ask people questions (just like the one I asked you twice in the last few posts) they tend not to answer or come back with some half assed insults.

At first you said I was just defending the club but I've openly said the club is full of sh*t so now you say I'm just defending Suarez.

It's long going on and on because I'm crazy in the sense that to believe Suarez did something wrong I would like some actual evidence, there isn't any so based on what we have my opinion isn't going to change. If something new comes out I'll have no problem saying I was wrong.

[Flojo]

It isn't dubbed, it's part of a documentary on a few of the monaco players, have a look around for the full thing.

The reason it's been brought up is because when Evra was asked why he didn't say to the ref Suarez called him a nigger he said it was because he doesn't like to use the word.

[jcee]

http://www.goal.com/...t-on-race-row-i

Mother of Liverpool star Luis Suarez says she fears for her son’s safety after he was found guilty of racially abusing Manchester United's Patrice Evra.

"He was very good friends with [Pablo] Caballero at Nacional, and he virtually lived with us at home. And we said to him all the time 'negro over here', 'negro over there'... I find it funny the English are like that."

We know where he got it all from..

[Benicio del Toney]

Flojo I think I saw you mention you have been studying Spanish for a while or atleast were, maybe this is why you have formed your opinion as you believe you have a good understanding of the Spanish language.

I did Latin at school for 5 years, the Latin language came before modern day Spanish and I came across the word "niger" (not offensive) very early, so I understand where you are coming from if that is indeed the case.

I have said on VIP before that my oldest friend of over 25 years is Spanish speaking Colombian, I know from my personal experience the f*ckries amongst South Americans.

Yes, there are friendly terms used in South America that closely resemble derogatory terms in the English speaking world.

Don't let this fool you into thinking racism and prejudice is not prevalent even in those parts of the world, cos I can tell you for a fact that it is.

My boy is very close with Tego Calderon, a black Puerto Rican rapper who keeps such matters close to his chest and in his material

"Black Latinos are not respected in Latin America and we will have to get it by defending our rights, much like African Americans struggled in the U.S."

The Suarez incident is more than a language one, Suarez is smart because this is what he tried to make it.

I am not particularly interested in the length of ban or the FA's agenda but I don't understand how you don't get the tone of the situation though.

[Benicio del Toney]

For anyone who didn't see the report

In the 58th minute of the game Mr Suárez fouled Mr Evra between the edge of the Manchester United penalty area and the corner flag at the Kop end. It seemed to us to be a deliberate foul and the referee awarded a free-kick. The foul was committed by Mr Suárez kicking Mr Evra on his right knee. Mr Evra explained that he had previously had a bad problem in that knee. He remained on the ground receiving medical treatment for about one minute after the tackle.

Mr Evra said that while he was lying on the ground, Mr Kuyt came up to him and said "stand up, you f*ck*ng prick". Mr Kuyt said "This is untrue. What I did say was something to the effect of 'Stand up, stand up', as if to say that it had been a foul but he was making too much of it."

The video footage did not show Mr Kuyt speaking to Mr Evra at this time but Mr Kuyt admitted that he did so. The dispute is about what Mr Kuyt said, not about whether he said anything to Mr Evra at that time. Very little attention was paid to this dispute during the hearing and we did not find it necessary in reaching our decision to make a finding about what Mr Kuyt had said to Mr Evra.

Mr Suárez wins a corner. On 62 minutes and 37 seconds Mr Suárez won a corner for Liverpool with a shot that was deflected past the post. Mr Suárez retrieved the ball from behind the goal and kicked it across to Steven Gerrard to take the corner. Mr Suárez started to move past the near post and along the goal-line.

Mr Evra and Mr Suárez in the goalmouth. It was Mr Evra's job to mark Mr Suárez at corners even though he was not marking him generally throughout the game. Mr Evra moved close to Mr Suárez so that he could mark him when the corner was taken. This was the first time that they had come together since Mr Suárez's foul on Mr Evra five minutes previously.

Mr Evra faced up to Mr Suárez and kept walking towards him. This forced Mr Suárez to move backwards along the goal-line and, in fact, slightly behind the goal-line. All the while they were talking to each other. They reached a position approximately halfway along the goal- line when Mr Kuyt, the Liverpool player, stepped in between Mr Suárez and Mr Evra. Mr Kuyt had been standing in the middle of the six-yard box where he was being marked by Jonny Evans, the Manchester United defender. Mr Kuyt faced up to Mr Evra and prodded him in the chest with his finger. Mr Evra pushed Mr Kuyt away in the chest with both hands. At this point Mr Suárez started a run out of the six-yard box towards the near post. Mr Evra ran with him. The corner was taken on 63 minutes and 5 seconds but by the time that Mr Suárez had flicked the ball on with his head into the goalmouth area, the referee had blown his whistle to stop play.

Mr Evra and Mr Suárez are agreed that they spoke to each other in Spanish in the goalmouth. Mr Evra said that he is not exactly fluent in Spanish but that he can easily converse in Spanish. For Mr Suárez Spanish is his native language as a Uruguayan. Mr Evra told us that he began the conversation by saying "Concha de tu hermana". Mr Evra's evidence was that this is a phrase used in Spanish like when you say "f*ck*ng hell" in English, but the literal translation is "your sister's p*ssy". Mr Suárez did not hear Mr Evra say this. One of the video clips that we have seen, taken from a close-up angle behind the goal, does appear to support Mr Evra's evidence that he started the conversation with this comment.

Mr Suárez said that he did not hear this first comment from Mr Evra but that he heard him whispering something. Mr Suárez told us that he then said "What did you say?" It does seem from the video footage that Mr Suárez does say something at this point in response to Mr Evra's opening comment.

Mr Evra told us that he then said to Mr Suárez "Porque me diste un golpe", meaning "Why did you kick me?". The video footage shows that Mr Evra looked down at his knee, then at Mr Suárez's face as he asked this question, which does support his evidence that he asked a question about being kicked in the knee. Mr Evra said that, when he asked that question, he was in shock and upset at having been kicked in the knee by Mr Suárez. Mr Suárez agrees that, at this point, Mr Evra asked him why he had kicked him, referring to the earlier foul. That is largely the end of the agreement between them as to what was said in the goalmouth.

Mr Evra's evidence was that, in response to his question "Why did you kick me?", Mr Suárez replied "Porque tu eres negro". Mr Evra said that at the time Mr Suárez made that comment, he (Mr Evra) understood it to mean "Because you are a nigger". He now says that he believes the words used by Mr Suárez mean "Because you are black". We shall consider further below Mr Evra's understanding of the Spanish word "negro".

Mr Suárez said that he replied to Mr Evra's question "Why did you kick me?" by saying "que habia sido una falta normal", meaning "it was just a normal foul". He said he shrugged his shoulders and put his arms out in a gesture to say that there was nothing serious about it. At this point on the video footage Mr Suárez's face is obscured but he does appear to shrug his shoulders.

Mr Evra said that he followed up Mr Suárez's reply "Because you are black" by saying "Habla otra vez asi, te voy a dar una porrada", which means "Say it to me again, I'm going to punch you". Mr Suárez replied by saying "No hablo con los negros". Mr Evra said that, at the time, he understood this to mean "I don't speak to niggers", although he now says it means "I don't speak to blacks".

Mr Suárez's evidence was that Mr Evra replied to the comment "it was just a normal foul" by saying "OK, you kicked me, I'm going to kick you". Mr Suárez said in his witness statement that his response was "Le dije que se callara e hice un gesto breve con mi mano izquierda parecido a la mocion de un "pato cuando hace cuac" para indicarle que hablaba mucho y deberia callarse", which was translated as "I told him to shut up and made a brief gesture with my left hand like a "quacking" motion as if to say he was talking too much and should be quiet".

Mr Evra said that after Mr Suárez said "I don't speak to blacks", he (Mr Evra) said "Ahora te voy a dar realmente una porrada", which means "OK, now I think I'm going to punch you". To this he says that Mr Suárez replied "Dale, negro...negro...negro". At the time Mr Evra understood this to mean "OK, nigger, nigger, nigger". He now says it means "OK, blackie, blackie, blackie". The expert witnesses stated that the phrase "Dale, negro" can be understood as "Bring it on, blackie" or "do it, blackie" or "go ahead, blackie".

Mr Evra said that as Mr Suárez was speaking he reached out to touch Mr Evra's arm, gesturing at his skin. Mr Evra said that Mr Suárez was drawing attention to the colour of Mr Evra's skin. This gesture is clearly shown on the video footage, just as Mr Kuyt comes between them. It seemed to us that Mr Suárez reached out and pinched Mr Evra's left forearm. In cross-examination Mr Evra said that at the time he did not realise that Mr Suárez had pinched his arm. He was more focused on his lips and what he was saying.

Mr Evra only realised that Mr Suárez had touched his arm in this way when he saw the video footage later.

As to the pinching of Mr Evra's arm, Mr Suárez said this in paragraph 27 of his witness statement: "Evra did not back off and Dirk Kuyt was approaching us to stand between us. At this point I touched PE's left arm in a pinching type movement. This all happened very quickly. I was trying to defuse the situation and was trying to intimate to Evra that he was not untouchable by reference to his question about the foul. Under no circumstances was this action intended to be offensive and most certainly not racially offensive. It was not in any way a reference to the colour of PE's skin."

Mr Suárez said that at no point did he use the word "negro" during the exchange with Mr Evra in the goalmouth.

[Flojo]

Flojo I think I saw you mention you have been studying Spanish for a while or atleast were, maybe this is why you have formed your opinion as you believe you have a good understanding of the Spanish language....

I have a basic understanding of spanish but nowhere near good enough to pass judgement on this incident. I looked at what was said and read the opinion of the linguistic expert along with what a few other spanish speaking people have said.

It's not that I don't think racism exists in south America, I just looked at what the evidence was and made my opinion. There are way too many holes in what Evra said that were overlooked with some that are so obvious it's painful.

The funny thing about the phrase 'por que tu eres negro' which is what Evra alleges Suarez said to him is that it's not even grammatically correct and doesn't exist in the form of Spanish Suarez speaks.

The FA has not noted that Suárez would never say “porque tu eres negro” (that is just not a way of speaking in the Rio de la Plata area), much less “porque tu es negro” or “tues negro” (as Comolly apparently stated), which are gramatically incorrect or just do not exist in Spanish. You don’t use the verb “ser” (to be) in the Rio de la Plata area that way. Luis Suarez would have said “porque SOS negro”. There is no possible variation or alternative to this whatsoever in our use of Spanish. And we of course don’t say “por que tu es negro” (as supposedly Commoly reported) because this is no Spanish syntax. In that sentence “es” is being wrongly conjugated in the third person of singular while it should have been conjugated in the second, “sos” (and never, I repeat, “eres”). Hence, I don't know what Comolli heard from Suarez after the match, but I am positive he got it wrong--unless we believe that Suarez cannot even speak Spanish.

/

Faze the report states that Evra lied about a key factor in the case and he admits it, what could be more clear than that?

[Kompressor]

There are lies/inconsistencies on both sides, but it's like you don't want to take note of that,

Which is why for how long I've said disregard Evra's statements and look solely at the testimony of Suarez, as that alone would've led to a ban of some sort,

So Unless Suarez lied to get himself into trouble it's all meh,

The FA note that's there's inconsistencies on both sides, however they deem one side more credible than the other,

It's pretty simple mate,

[Flojo]

I agreed there were inconsistencies on both sides ages ago (with the Comolli & Kuyt point being the notable one on the side of Suarez) and posted a response to it.

Loads of posts from this thread have gone missing since the site went down.

[Kompressor]

So stop talking about Evra's lies without mentioning the other lies in the case,

Do you believe that based on Suarez's testimony alone there would have been some sort of ban,

Where He admits to using the term "Negrito"

Honestly now,

Just answer that question honestly and as neautrally as possible and put the debate to bed.

Bearing in mind that he wasn't banned for being racist, but was banned for using an offensive term,

Evra was offended

The FA deem the word unacceptable,

Open and shut really, only grey area Is the length of ban

[Flojo]

The reason I mentioned Evra's lies is because it's his testimony that has been taken for gospel and it's him that has been deemed the credible witness by the FA.

Suarez has been labeled a liar by the FA based on the inconsistencies with Kuyt and Comolli and Evra's opinion is being portrayed as fact despite the fact there are more inconsistencies with his testimony than with Suarez' and they're even more significant.

The term used was 'negro' and yes there was going to be a ban if the FA believed it was a reference to his skin colour. they dismissed the cultural factor, Fair Enough.

But according to the FA's rules by the same notion there should have been a ban for Evra referring to Suarez' south american heritage. There wasn't so make what you will of that and all the other factors that make this hearing a farce and a stitch up.

[JOHN DOE]

WOW THIS BLOJO YUTE IS STILL GOING ON FACK

[Flat Eric]

Lol flo goes in for his players

thats love

[FANTA]

its laughable that lfc fans on here assume no-one but lfc fans have the read report, as if to say we're somehow missing the BIG point

both sides had their faults in testimony and evidence, the FA decided to side with Evra's versions of events, just take it on the chin and keep it moving

[Rsonist]

Robbie Fowler as Lionel Ritchie...

http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2083052/Former-England-striker-Robbie-Fowler-posting-blacked-fancy-dress-image-Twitter.html?ITO=1490

[JOHN DOE]

lionel ritchie is black

robbie fowler is white

he wanted to go as ritchie why wouldnt he make himself look as close to ritchie as poss

not racist

this is getting silly now

[Kompressor]

The reason I mentioned Evra's lies is because it's his testimony that has been taken for gospel and it's him that has been deemed the credible witness by the FA.

Suarez has been labeled a liar by the FA based on the inconsistencies with Kuyt and Comolli and Evra's opinion is being portrayed as fact despite the fact there are more inconsistencies with his testimony than with Suarez' and they're even more significant.

The term used was 'negro' and yes there was going to be a ban if the FA believed it was a reference to his skin colour. they dismissed the cultural factor, Fair Enough.

But according to the FA's rules by the same notion there should have been a ban for Evra referring to Suarez' south american heritage. There wasn't so make what you will of that and all the other factors that make this hearing a farce and a stitch up.

So if you agree that Suarez's own testimony proves his guilt in the eyes of the FA what's the problem?

Let's break it down,

1.He was accused of using an offensive term,

2.He admitted to using the term,

3.The FA also deem the term offensive and unacceptable,

4.He gets a ban,

Even if Evra didn't attend the hearing didn't make any further statement, didn't change his testimony, an even if he backed up Suarez's version of events,

Your man would've been banned, and rightly so.

That is why your club have chosen to shut up an let common sense take over,

That's why a court case would've been another defeat for your club and player.

And that is why this arguement is redundant.

Your not a stupid person, stop missing the sheer obvious and just look at the case for what it is,

Whether I shot the guy once or eight times, is irrelevant, as from when I admitted to killing him I'm going to jail, to appeal would be idiotic after admitting my guilt.

SMH

[Flojo]

It was a stitch up Kompressor and the FA pre determined the outcome of their verdict by dismissing the notion cultural differences were relevant, that's my problem.

And you can keep ignoring the points I've made that indicate it was a bullshit hearing but you're not stupid so I'm pretty sure you know it was a sham.

If something is wrong it's wrong for everybody, not selectively when you want to make an example of somebody.

If Suarez is charged then Evra has to be charged by the same rule, it is as simple as that really.

[Fresh]

f*ck a cultural difference

If you bear out your breast on a beach in Dubai you'll get shifted

If you use the word Negro in England you'll get served similarly.

When in Rome...

[Flojo]

Ok dismiss cultural differences and the fact Evra came up to him and started the convo in another language.

Why are you ignoring the point that if Suarez is guilty that Evra is guilty by the same rule?

[Kompressor]

Well if Liverpool made a complaint about Evra using an offensive term,

Which he did IMO by his own testimony,

But surely as after hearing what Evra said during the hearing, it seems as if Suarez wasn't offended by it. So.......

I'd hope upon hearing the news of what Evra said, someone at United would've had a word with him in no uncertain terms regarding his future conduct and what is and isn't acceptable.

If Liverpool were to bring this up to the FA. On my mothers life I wouldn't be supporting Evra the way your club and fans have done Suarez,

From when a man admits his guilt in sonething, the level of support you offer them has to be limited

But as I said, ut seems as if Suarez wasn't offended enough to bring up some sort of "counter claim" upon hearing what Evra had said.

If my house gets robbed, and I don't report it to the police, they will do nothing, won't cone to dust for prints and I will not get a crime reference number.