that a scenario like this might be playing out now and in the coming weeks:
- Suarez if found guilty & banned for 8 games.
- LFC are almost incredulous in responding to the decision and stand by their man while making accusations of the FA
- The FA rightly want to stamp out racism and abuse which involves the colour of another players skin.
- The Suarez case has given the the opportunity to show the world (& FIFA) that these things must be stamped out and a hand shake will not suffice.
- LFC appeal the decision reached, not necessarily the extent of punishment
- The appeal can only really find 2 results. (1) Evidence is sufficient & verdict stands (2) Insufficient evidence and verdict quashed, and thus so is the punishment.
- If, as LFC assert, the evidence is weak and is effectively Evra's word vs Suarez's word, then the appeal would likely succeed and the ban lifted
- The FA are not really interested in outcome because their mission is accomplished.....Their mission is not an anti-LFC/Suarez agenda but an Anti-Racism agenda. If the appeal shows Suarez as innocent then they'll probably accept that decision. What has been achieved is that it has been shown to the World that in England, IF someone is found guilty of Racism on the football pitch then they will be severely punished because it should not be tolerated.
I thought before the verdict that the FA would find it hard to prove him guilty and would some midle ground between declaring him 100% guilty and 100% innocent, so that the trial is fair but the right message is sent out.
The way it seems to have happened has resulted in some calling the trial unfair but at the end of the process, after an appeal, whatever the verdict, the message has been sent out there that Racism WIll Be Punished and the actual verdict is almost irrelevant.
It seems like a strange way to go about things, but the more i think about it the more i reach the conclusion that Suarez (who used the quoted terms) could not be found 100% innocent , even if he was not guilty of racism and the only way a good message is sent out, regarding Racsim, is this way which sets a benchmark for the guilty...even if he is later proved innocent.
I have a feeling.....
posted on 21/12/11
The incident wasn't reported to the FA by the player concerned (Ferdinand). A member of the public complained about it, hence the police involvement.
==================================================
Yes, that is the reason they are entitled to do it, and why they were not entitled to do it with Suarez. But they still could have conducted their own investigation.
They deliberated over it for a while, and then passed it on.
posted on 21/12/11
So that one word - used in isolation, is merely a 'way of addressing someone'? When in the context of a heated exchange with a snarling glare.....sure it is
==================================================
Yes, according to some Spanish colleagues I spoke to, and according to the Uruguayan press,, there are no circumstances in which it would be considered racist.
But we don't even know if that's the incriminating issue., it's just speculation. LFC are saying that the incriminating issue is Evra's word against Suarez's, and since Suarez admits to using that word, they clearly don't think that's what he's been done for.
posted on 21/12/11
I see that Terry has been charged with racism. This must be very convenient for the FA. He will be judged under the legal system which is more rigorous than the FA's disciplinary system. He will be subject to standard punishment which will be a fine (much smaller than the one imposed on Suarez) and the punishment cannot involve any match ban, unless he is imprisoned, which is highly unlikely. The FA can then conveniently say that there is no need for them to take further action as he has been punished once under a more rigorous legal process.
posted on 21/12/11
Yes, according to some Spanish colleagues I spoke to, and according to the Uruguayan press,, there are no circumstances in which it would be considered racist.
--------------------------------------
In a word.......Bollox
posted on 21/12/11
In a word.......Bollox
==================================================
Ah, well, that's such an articulate bit of debating, it's pretty much incontrovertible.
Can you enlighten us further as to what the Uruguayan Press do think, then?
posted on 21/12/11
It doesn't matter a monkeys nuts what the press in Uruguay say in relation to this issue.
The incident took place in the UK, he lives in the UK, he plays for a team in the UK & therefore lives by the rules of the UK.
Ignorance is no excuse & he's lived in Europe for 4 years anyway, so he knew fine well that his choice of words would offend Evra, hence the reason he used them - as they were in a moment of conflict.
posted on 21/12/11
Ignorance is no excuse & he's lived in Europe for 4 years
==================================================
He didn’t plead ignorance of the law, you plum. He knows racism is illegal.
But English law (or in this case, FA Law) does not define any foreign expressions which will be deemed illegal here. Nobody had defined that word as racist until Evra said it was. That would be a new precedent, if that’s what he was done for.
But the debate has moved on from this anyway, because Liverpool’s statement implies that they don’t think he was done for using that word . It implies that they think he was done for a conversation in the goalmouth which only Evra heard. I would hazard a guess, in that case, that the word in question is ‘Negro’, which is racist even in Suarez’s native tongue, if used in anger.
posted on 21/12/11
Toblerone Boots, you hit the nail on the head before when you said Suarez didn't know how far 'off the scale' the word negrito was in the UK. It didn't even register on the scale. There was no english meaning to measure its usage against. We have now derived a meaning for the word from one of its possible Uruguyan interpretations and are retrospectively applying that limited meaning to judge Suarez usage of the word. Yet you claim that ignorance of the english meaning of the word is no defence. Everyone was ignorant of the english meaning of negrito when Suarez used it because it didn't have one.
Its one thing to decide that now that we have ascribed meaning to this word it is in future not deemed acceptable. But you're argument is akin to lowering the speed limit on a road and then retrospectively fining people who exceeded the new speed limit before it was applied. And claiming that ignorance is no defence
posted on 21/12/11
Everyone was ignorant of the english meaning of negrito when Suarez used it because it didn't have one.
--------------------------------------------------
Really? You're not being serious are you?
So that word has never been translated before Suarez 'just happened' to use it when having a pop at Evra? Belter that one lad
http://www.dictionarist.com/negrito
posted on 21/12/11
So that word has never been translated before Suarez 'just happened' to use it when having a pop at Evra? Belter that one lad
==================================================
Of course it has. But tell us where it was defined as 'racist'