the FA letting him watch the video three times before his statement whilst taking Suarez's on the spot, the language experts opinion, the complete lack of witnesses and so on is moot.
=========
Club rivalries aside, no one would stand for any outcome from that panel and hearing.

He might have or not have done it, that's besides the point for now. Fact is there's never been a more kangarooey court.

comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago

The FA dont need sh!t to prosecute after a charge. In fact they have about a 99% conviction rate or something daft so all the stuff of Evra changing his story multiple times, the FA letting him watch the video three times before his statement whilst taking Suarez's on the spot, the language experts opinion, the complete lack of witnesses and so on is moot.

Its not the law, it's the FA and they do what they want.
-------------------

Suarez by his own mouth admitted referencing skin colour. He was abusing Evra whilst doing it. Therefore he was guilty according to their laws.

Its dawned on you how stupid you are

............

It's

Yeah they do what they want.

Yeah they do what they want.

.................

Not if you have a good case in your favour, as per Jose last week.

Suarez by his own mouth admitted referencing skin colour. He was abusing Evra whilst doing it. Therefore he was guilty according to their laws.
=======
That's what the kangaroo panel told you and being a Manc that was it for you.

But, yes Hoody, they certainly try their hardest to.

comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago

Yeah they do what they want.
-------------------

A bit childish for you.

That's what the kangaroo panel told you

..............

It is what Nibbles told them, Mamba.

comment by Vidicschin (U3584)
Yeah they do what they want.
.................
Not if you have a good case in your favour, as per Jose last week.
========
Of course. United's is good and everyone else's (99%) is not good.

The FA doesn't care if you have a good case. We've seen many with a avoid case go down.

They only care if you're Manchester United or not.

*a good

comment by No Love - Monumentally Dope. (U1282)
posted 1 minute ago
*a good
----------------------------------------------------------------------
You won't need me soon

Yeah, I can actually feel myself improving.

comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago

Yeah they do what they want.
-------------------

A bit childish for you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Possibly but I just feel it's a very flakey case and I'm certain the FA did their best to return a guilty verdict which isn't right really. The way they took the statements is testament to that and for all the 'Suarez admitted it' stuff he didn't admit to racially abusing him. At all.

Its all very subjective and Suarez paid the price. That's it really.

The FA doesn't care if you have a good case.

................

Take your tin foil hat off. The FA had to throw one out only last week.

comment by No Love - Monumentally Dope. (U1282)
posted 6 minutes ago

Suarez by his own mouth admitted referencing skin colour. He was abusing Evra whilst doing it. Therefore he was guilty according to their laws.
=======
That's what the kangaroo panel told you and being a Manc that was it for you.
-------------

No, that is what Suarez said. Part of his whole defence was about how the words he used had different meanings in different countries/cultures. There was no denial that he referenced skin colour. He also admitted under questioning that he pinched Evra and that it wasn't friendly, after initially claiming it was done in an attempt to console Evra (which is laughable).

You should actually try reading the report.

comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago

comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago

Yeah they do what they want.
-------------------

A bit childish for you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Possibly but I just feel it's a very flakey case and I'm certain the FA did their best to return a guilty verdict which isn't right really. The way they took the statements is testament to that and for all the 'Suarez admitted it' stuff he didn't admit to racially abusing him. At all.

Its all very subjective and Suarez paid the price. That's it really.
-------------------------

No, he didn't admit to racially abusing him. But if you look at the FA's rules/laws in detail, as I did at the time, then he was technically guilty and he gave up that evidence himself by admitting that he referenced the colour of Evra's skin.

I thought that the reasoning behind the FA's verdict was perhaps questionable. At the time I wasn't convinced he would/should be found guilty. Nor do I think he is a racist. However, on reflection, I do think that guilty was the correct verdict and I am quite sure that he was referencing Evra's skin colour to get a response. It was a risky game and he paid the price.

comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 20 seconds ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 3 minutes ago

comment by Elvis (U7425)
posted 3 minutes ago
comment by Robbing_Hoody - as a rule I don't trust a man who doesn't drink but I do trust James Milner (U6374)
posted 2 minutes ago

Yeah they do what they want.
-------------------

A bit childish for you.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Possibly but I just feel it's a very flakey case and I'm certain the FA did their best to return a guilty verdict which isn't right really. The way they took the statements is testament to that and for all the 'Suarez admitted it' stuff he didn't admit to racially abusing him. At all.

Its all very subjective and Suarez paid the price. That's it really.
-------------------------

No, he didn't admit to racially abusing him. But if you look at the FA's rules/laws in detail, as I did at the time, then he was technically guilty and he gave up that evidence himself by admitting that he referenced the colour of Evra's skin.

I thought that the reasoning behind the FA's verdict was perhaps questionable. At the time I wasn't convinced he would/should be found guilty. Nor do I think he is a racist. However, on reflection, I do think that guilty was the correct verdict and I am quite sure that he was referencing Evra's skin colour to get a response. It was a risky game and he paid the price.
----------------------------------------------------------------------

Think that is a fair post Elvis

and I am quite sure that he was referencing Evra's skin colour to get a response.

.................

I think this is a conclusion anyone who has ever played the game will probably come to.

Especially when you consider Nibble previous behavior.

I said at the time, before the verdict, that I would be surprised if he was found guilty. Have to admit that I didn't realise how high the FA's conviction rate was at the time. After the verdict and the report came out I looked at the FA's laws/rules in more detail and I think that got the right verdict, but possibly took the wrong route to get there.

I would also add that you should maybe take a look at the FA's conviction rate and what it relates to. If you add in the red cards that are overturned, they conviction rate falls significantly. There are few other factors that make the conviction rate a bit more acceptable. I read on article on it a few years back, but can't find it right now.

Klopp doesn't have whiskeynose

Klopp is better

I think you are a typical bitter United fan