Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I just worry that players will start waving imaginary race cards.
- - - -
>>I just worry that players will start waving imaginary race cards.
what colour card though??
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
I have to say I kind of agree, but it would definitely be a strange way to go about it. If the decision is overturned upon appeal, then surely the FA just end up looking pretty stupid for convicting without suffiient evidence in the 1st place?
Tbh, this scenario is pretty accurate
Devonshirespur (U6316)
Its a very interesting point. If written by a Liverpool fan I think calls of paranoia, and the old 'victim' insults would be thrown at. As a Spurs fan on the good side of the London Media (joke ) it will be taken a bit more seriously.
You may well be right. But what gives the FA the right to make an example of Suarez. Regardless of the result of the appeal Suarez will have this label to his character for the rest of his career.
Even now there are plenty of posters that have labeled him a racist as a result of this verdict, despite one of the elements of the verdict stating that he is not a racist.
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
----------------------------
It's not 'weak' though, he's admitted using the word & there's video evidence.
The panel took 6 days examining the evidence & coming to their conclusion, there's no way the FA will overule that decision lightly.
LFC would be prudent to appeal the length of the ban rather than the conclusion reached imo.
His defence is hardly strenghtened by the fact that he's got another FA charge pending i.e. the one finger salute at Fulham, as he'll be seen to have not made a huge effort to 'keep his nose clean' since the Evra incident.....
It's not 'weak' though, he's admitted using the word & there's video evidence.
-=----------
Is there video evidence? Have there been any official announcements on this? Or are you just taking hearsay that you've read in the media as fact?
Devonshirespur, Totally agree. When I heard David Davies say on the BBC that he thought Liverpool would appeal I thought exactly the same thing.
- 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.
==================================
Almost right. I'd say it's more of a rabidly anti-FIFA agenda that involves the FA being seen to take an anti-racist stance to try and make Blatter look bad rather than any real ant-racist intent. Purely political.
There is a political train going at full speed and Suarez will be thrown in front of it. The intent is to send a message that anything that even whiffs of race related whether intended negatively or not will be punished without fail.
The case and facts are completely irrelevant at this point.
Free Suarez!
Biglaa...the FA may look stupid but they have little respect anyway. In any event, its the independent panel who give the recommendation, which is absolves the FA from any poor decision making. The FA aren't the judge, they just administer the punishment. They;re more like prison wardens
Toblerone....Although he may have admitted using such a word that is not an admission of racism, as he no doubt made the case
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.
________________________________
You may be my most disliked ja606 member but this is a very good point Devonshire.
Toblerone....Although he may have admitted using such a word that is not an admission of racism, as he no doubt made the case
----------------------------------------
He's not been accused of racism. He's been accused & found guilty, of being racially abusive towards Evra. There's a distinct difference.
He admitted using the word & given the context of it's use, they have obviously concluded that he was using it in a manner intended to cause his opponent distress. It is therefore racial abuse.
There can be no defence, as he's admitted it & he was in no way using it as a 'term of endearment' at the time.
He got a 4 match ban for verbally abusing the player & it was doubled due to the racial element.
He's banged to rights. If kopites want to blame someone for this, then they should blame their own club, as the advice he got at the start was awful.
If he'd have denied the use of the word, they'd have found it very difficult to prove & he'd have probably got off, as soon as he admitted it, he was stuffed.
>>There can be no defence
he used the word but didn't use it to cause distress.
It's an incredibly common term in Spanish speaking countries. And from the sounds of it at both Liverpool and Manu among their players.
It effectively means mate.
It effectively means mate
-----------------------------
So it was 'friendly banter'?
Do me a favour
Toblerone...you make very sound points.
My view is that the main issue is the context and intent of the use of the word(s)...and that is open to different interpretations, its subjective, especially if its just Suarez's word vs Evra's. because of this i thought they would find it hard to find him guilty. Guilty of using the word but not necessarily of using it maliciously.
As we stand he is a guilty man and I think LFC should have been more guarded in their statement
>>So it was 'friendly banter'?
of course not
I'm positive he said a whole host of nasty things just not racist ones
Like the FA, Evra and Suarez all stated, he's not a racist
Devonshire - the issue of the context was obviously close to the crux of it. The videos of their 'exchanges' during the game show that there was animosity at the point that he admits to using the word. It is therefore impossible to use the defence that he was using it in a way that could possibly be contrued as 'friendly' at that point in time. Therefore, he used it intending to cause offence, it is therefore - racial abuse.
The defence that "it's Ok in Uruguay" also holds no water. As what's acceptable or otherwise in South America is irrelevant on these shores & ignorance is no excuse.
Would he use that term whilst out for a pint on a saturday night in Liverpool City Centre? I very much doubt it......
Mate, you're a Twaat
Negrito, you're a Twaat
If that's what happened, Suarez did nothing wrong and has a defence
I don't know what happened and neither do you
The context and intent is king in this, not using the word in a heated exchange.
Mate, you're a Twaat
Negrito, you're a Twaat
If that's what happened, Suarez did nothing wrong and has a defence
-------------------------------------------
So you think that if you used those 2 expressions whilst having a heated disussion with a black person, that they'd have the same response to both?
Behave yourself.
If used in an agressive manner that word only has one connotation, I don't care which continent you're from.
Irrespective, it's not acceptable on these shores to use that word - the end. It might be acceptable to mount goats in Uruguay, for all I know, but you'd do a stretch for it over here.
>>it's not acceptable on these shores to use that word - the end.
then you're going to have to ban all the south americans in the league and half the Manu and Liverpool squads. They all use it all the time.
Your cultural ignorance shouldn't be everyone elses problem.
And have a happy xmas my negrito
Sign in if you want to comment
I have a feeling.....
Page 1 of 2
posted on 21/12/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/12/11
I just worry that players will start waving imaginary race cards.
- - - -
posted on 21/12/11
>>I just worry that players will start waving imaginary race cards.
what colour card though??
posted on 21/12/11
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 21/12/11
I have to say I kind of agree, but it would definitely be a strange way to go about it. If the decision is overturned upon appeal, then surely the FA just end up looking pretty stupid for convicting without suffiient evidence in the 1st place?
posted on 21/12/11
Tbh, this scenario is pretty accurate
posted on 21/12/11
Devonshirespur (U6316)
Its a very interesting point. If written by a Liverpool fan I think calls of paranoia, and the old 'victim' insults would be thrown at. As a Spurs fan on the good side of the London Media (joke ) it will be taken a bit more seriously.
You may well be right. But what gives the FA the right to make an example of Suarez. Regardless of the result of the appeal Suarez will have this label to his character for the rest of his career.
Even now there are plenty of posters that have labeled him a racist as a result of this verdict, despite one of the elements of the verdict stating that he is not a racist.
posted on 21/12/11
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
----------------------------
It's not 'weak' though, he's admitted using the word & there's video evidence.
The panel took 6 days examining the evidence & coming to their conclusion, there's no way the FA will overule that decision lightly.
LFC would be prudent to appeal the length of the ban rather than the conclusion reached imo.
His defence is hardly strenghtened by the fact that he's got another FA charge pending i.e. the one finger salute at Fulham, as he'll be seen to have not made a huge effort to 'keep his nose clean' since the Evra incident.....
posted on 21/12/11
It's not 'weak' though, he's admitted using the word & there's video evidence.
-=----------
Is there video evidence? Have there been any official announcements on this? Or are you just taking hearsay that you've read in the media as fact?
posted on 21/12/11
Devonshirespur, Totally agree. When I heard David Davies say on the BBC that he thought Liverpool would appeal I thought exactly the same thing.
posted on 21/12/11
- 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.
==================================
Almost right. I'd say it's more of a rabidly anti-FIFA agenda that involves the FA being seen to take an anti-racist stance to try and make Blatter look bad rather than any real ant-racist intent. Purely political.
posted on 21/12/11
There is a political train going at full speed and Suarez will be thrown in front of it. The intent is to send a message that anything that even whiffs of race related whether intended negatively or not will be punished without fail.
The case and facts are completely irrelevant at this point.
Free Suarez!
posted on 21/12/11
Biglaa...the FA may look stupid but they have little respect anyway. In any event, its the independent panel who give the recommendation, which is absolves the FA from any poor decision making. The FA aren't the judge, they just administer the punishment. They;re more like prison wardens
Toblerone....Although he may have admitted using such a word that is not an admission of racism, as he no doubt made the case
posted on 21/12/11
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.
________________________________
You may be my most disliked ja606 member but this is a very good point Devonshire.
posted on 21/12/11
Toblerone....Although he may have admitted using such a word that is not an admission of racism, as he no doubt made the case
----------------------------------------
He's not been accused of racism. He's been accused & found guilty, of being racially abusive towards Evra. There's a distinct difference.
He admitted using the word & given the context of it's use, they have obviously concluded that he was using it in a manner intended to cause his opponent distress. It is therefore racial abuse.
There can be no defence, as he's admitted it & he was in no way using it as a 'term of endearment' at the time.
He got a 4 match ban for verbally abusing the player & it was doubled due to the racial element.
He's banged to rights. If kopites want to blame someone for this, then they should blame their own club, as the advice he got at the start was awful.
If he'd have denied the use of the word, they'd have found it very difficult to prove & he'd have probably got off, as soon as he admitted it, he was stuffed.
posted on 21/12/11
Love you Too Fred
posted on 21/12/11
>>There can be no defence
he used the word but didn't use it to cause distress.
It's an incredibly common term in Spanish speaking countries. And from the sounds of it at both Liverpool and Manu among their players.
It effectively means mate.
posted on 21/12/11
It effectively means mate
-----------------------------
So it was 'friendly banter'?
Do me a favour
posted on 21/12/11
Toblerone...you make very sound points.
My view is that the main issue is the context and intent of the use of the word(s)...and that is open to different interpretations, its subjective, especially if its just Suarez's word vs Evra's. because of this i thought they would find it hard to find him guilty. Guilty of using the word but not necessarily of using it maliciously.
As we stand he is a guilty man and I think LFC should have been more guarded in their statement
posted on 21/12/11
>>So it was 'friendly banter'?
of course not
I'm positive he said a whole host of nasty things just not racist ones
Like the FA, Evra and Suarez all stated, he's not a racist
posted on 21/12/11
Devonshire - the issue of the context was obviously close to the crux of it. The videos of their 'exchanges' during the game show that there was animosity at the point that he admits to using the word. It is therefore impossible to use the defence that he was using it in a way that could possibly be contrued as 'friendly' at that point in time. Therefore, he used it intending to cause offence, it is therefore - racial abuse.
The defence that "it's Ok in Uruguay" also holds no water. As what's acceptable or otherwise in South America is irrelevant on these shores & ignorance is no excuse.
Would he use that term whilst out for a pint on a saturday night in Liverpool City Centre? I very much doubt it......
posted on 21/12/11
Mate, you're a Twaat
Negrito, you're a Twaat
If that's what happened, Suarez did nothing wrong and has a defence
I don't know what happened and neither do you
The context and intent is king in this, not using the word in a heated exchange.
posted on 21/12/11
Mate, you're a Twaat
Negrito, you're a Twaat
If that's what happened, Suarez did nothing wrong and has a defence
-------------------------------------------
So you think that if you used those 2 expressions whilst having a heated disussion with a black person, that they'd have the same response to both?
Behave yourself.
If used in an agressive manner that word only has one connotation, I don't care which continent you're from.
Irrespective, it's not acceptable on these shores to use that word - the end. It might be acceptable to mount goats in Uruguay, for all I know, but you'd do a stretch for it over here.
posted on 21/12/11
>>it's not acceptable on these shores to use that word - the end.
then you're going to have to ban all the south americans in the league and half the Manu and Liverpool squads. They all use it all the time.
Your cultural ignorance shouldn't be everyone elses problem.
posted on 21/12/11
And have a happy xmas my negrito
Page 1 of 2