So Suarez apparently racially abused PE although we have no evidence to support this but that doesn't matter, the FA have upheld a decision to ban the player on the word of another.
Let's look at another serious incident, the forearm smash by Wayne Rooney to a fellow professional... An incident that would receive a worse punishment in a court of law than someone who claims to have been called an offensive term. Not to mention the fact that it's captured on camera!
Now, what was the outcome of this 'worse' offence?
No charge !
Well why not ? ....
Because the referee didn't make a note of it in the match report !
Ladies & gentlemen, what else do you expect from a body that done all in their power to reduce the ban of one of their national players even though it was a worse incident than the one they've thrown the book at Suarez.
I know what's happening and I'm fully aware that all the papers today make a point of saying that 'Liverpool have no grounds to appeal' - nice work, these journalists know what they're doing. They think that if the club appeals then it gives everyone the ground to attack the club... Yet again !
Can I also make the point that everyone acknowledges that we must take into consideration the possibility of the incident but when the excuses are facial expressions and calm demeanours then we may as well forget football altogether.
A mockery of justice and a player who's waved the race card getting all the backing.
.... Well, you can't expect the FA to back Suarez after the heated exchange with blatter. They'd look even more stupid than they already do !
2 serious offences
posted on 1/1/12
blue mosaics
Intentionally missing the point, how refreshing.
If someone is banned from their profession (making them a huge target for rival fans in the process), WITHOUT any credible evidence then that is totally wrong, regardless of club.
Move away from your keyboard, contemplate what I and many others have mentioned on this site and then try applying some objectivity to your thinking. Common sense dictates that this ruling by the FA is total and utter crap
posted on 1/1/12
Proud Scouse,neither of us were present at the hearing, but I do not see why a tribunal hearing and seeing the witnesses and deciding Suarez was not reliable is not credible evidence. It's the way many cases are decided in courts and tribunals every day.
posted on 1/1/12
Move away from your keyboard, contemplate what I and many others have mentioned on this site and then try applying some objectivity to your thinking. Common sense dictates that this ruling by the FA is total and utter crap
exactly, however right or wrong, the club and fans would probably have accepted the 4 match ban for suarez admitting he used the word negro in that one exchange.
Not saying this is correct, but it seemed as though the FA were always going to look to make a stand, regardless of home suarez the perceived the comment to taken.
what there is disgust at, is the extension of this ban based on the panels assertion that somebody else's version of events is correct. reasoning based on zero hard evidence and the disregard shown to kuyt as witness. The FA have looked to make an example when they should have dealt with the FACTS in hand
posted on 1/1/12
Proud Scouse, my point was't about the Suarez case specifically but about your post, where you said that if the 'roles were reversed then so would the stance'.
All I asked was: did this apply to YOUR (not shouting there, just for emphasis) stance? In other words: if your role was reversed then would your stance be reversed as well?
posted on 1/1/12
blue mosaics
I've let you know my thoughts on this issue and I imagine that beneath the pettiness you actually agree with me and other objective football fans.
The FA's ruling is a joke and they've set a worrying precedent.
posted on 1/1/12
one of the inconsistencies that panel accepted for evra was why he used the word black to the ref and not what he initially thought suarez had meant
he claimed he would not say that word as it disgusted him which is why he chose black.
this blows that little gem out of the water: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=l4_fQXwIV4E
35:35 for example A
posted on 1/1/12
The FA's ruling is a joke and they've set a worrying precedent.
-------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
I think I probably agree with you PS, certainly on the strength of the punishment.
But that wasn't my question. I just wanted to know whether you thought that your assersion applied to yourself, whether you were prepared to be as objective with your own opinions as you wanted everyone else to be with theirs.
But you knew that didn't you?
I don't think I need to contribute more to this thread. I've agreed that Suarez punishment seems excessive and I also understand that you are going to continue avoiding my question. I was going to say 'only you know why', but I think we all understand the reason.
posted on 1/1/12
Yep
Evra used the n.gg.r word.
Say no more
posted on 1/1/12
blue mosaics
Ignoring your petty points scoring nonsense, well done for being objective and seeing sense on the Suarez issue.
The FA has dropped a clanger on this one.........be interesting to see what happens when the next 'convincing' claim of racism is brought up with no solid evidence. I guess the FA will just have to believe that the accusation is correct and then ban the 'guilty' player.
posted on 1/1/12
ProudScouse, of course you are entitled to your view, but I do not understand your ' no solid evidence' point. Suarez was found guilty in the same way many others are found guilty or in the same way cases are proved in civil courts by a Tribunal hearing evidence, assessing witnesses and coming to a view. The next such case will be decided on it's own facts. On the next occasion, the tribunal may find the accused to be reliable and find him not guilty.