You can tell jimmy went to Cambridge
(if you don't get it, then read the article from the start and hear SLMs audacious claim about hearing)
Henry
But the fact is, what happened between Suarez and Evra is a mystery. No one else heard and it was down to lip reading and gestures to come to a verdict. (did English people lip read a conversation in Spanish? If so, )
Your case would be different as I'm sure someone else would have heard.
I used to like liverpool, however I must say, it is in my opinion,the most racist place I have ever been to.
I worked up there for a few months not long ago and the people although friendly were a bunch of racist idiots. Not all of them but more than enough to make me not want to go back again.
and yet if the player had misheard what was said then nobody would have informed the police as the term would not have been racist. works both ways
---
i'm sorry but players are abused for 90 mins week in week out, they know it's part and parcel of the game, racial abuse is a no-no and for the player to react like he did is clear to me that he was racially abused. if there was any chance of mishearing do you think your chief exec, director of football, press officer and manager would meet the police and oldham directors in the tunnel after the match?
why is saurez any different? are the fa keen to minimise the damage done to the image of the game?
because, and it has been done to death, the FA found suarez guilty on a probably verdict.
the use of that word on the single occasion would be deemed non racist if the FA believed his version of events prior to this. they didnt and decided that he used the word another 6 times without proof based on a probable verdict.
this verdict is not used in a court of law. beyond reasonable doubt is and under that suarez would be innocent. Do you get it yet?
the continued support for suarez is how the FA can arrive at that "probable" decision when they are glaring inconsistencies in evra's account also.
No appeal was made because the "crusade" from the media made suarez public enemy no1 and allowed biffs like you licence to spout karp without knowing the facts
RSC. We still don't know for a fact what was said. By the way, at least one person has made a statement to the police according to reports. I have no idea what was said, but is it inconceivable that the person said 'Manc' instead of 'black' as has been reported? Its not right either way, but you're assuming that the person in question is guilty and guilty of the worst accusation at that. Not being very objective are you?
trousers
suarez admitted he used the word 'negro' when adressing patrice evra
Lucas
-----
I was on jury duty in June. And that was our insertions from the judge. To balance out the probability that the 3 boys did not commit the crime.
it is in my opinion,the most racist place I have ever been to.
Even though I disagree, I respect you for sayiing its in your opinion. However, most others would say it is the most racist place in the country. I'm just glad you put some realism into it.
SouthLondonManc. Em, yes, well, I think I'm beginning to get a handle on you, ish. Em, eh, let's see how this goes. "The sun rises in the East and sets in the West" no? Too difficult? How about, " if yer auntie had balls she'd be yer uncle" . Its a difficult world out there isn't it. JimmyTheRed
There is a huge difference between the Schmeichel and Suarez cases and that is that Schmeichel said nothing, zero which was remotely racist or could possibly have been construed as racist which Ian Wright ultimately admitted. From the outset everyone knew because Suarez admitted it, that he said a word which to anyone with any brain appeared to refer to the colour of Evra's skin. That is a fact however you want to spin it. The whole defence was about whether that was acceptable or not. On Evra's evidence what Suarez said was a whole lot worse and that tended to be backed up by the video ,what other witnesses said and inconsistencies in Suarez's various statements. But even if Suarez only said what he himself admitted to saying it is a whole lot worse than what Schmeichel said which was nothing at all and a complete 100% fabrication.
i'm sorry but players are abused for 90 mins week in week out, they know it's part and parcel of the game, racial abuse is a no-no and for the player to react like he did is clear to me that he was racially abused. if there was any chance of mishearing do you think your chief exec, director of football, press officer and manager would meet the police and oldham directors in the tunnel after the match?
are you an idiot? so you have made a judgement that there is no way the player could have misheard what was said...thats it...final!
The club have already said they are investigating, what more can they do at this stage without knowing the facts.
i sincerely hope you never get asked to go on jury duty
are the fa keen to minimise the damage done to the image of the game?
------------
Tbh I think they may have intensified it. I can imagine more cases like this now in the future as some players try and get players banned, especially with the high punishment of 8 games.
I'm not say it's right, but I can see this happening, as I think there are a few players out there that will do this kind of thing to get an opposition player banned, and in effect put themselves in a stronger position.
Henry
Yes. But do you even realise why the saga has gone on for so long?
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES! I bet most didn't even read as to why it went on for ages. Just took it as a chance to have a pop at us. But I'm sorry, I've had more hurtful pops from bubble wrap
There is a huge difference between the Schmeichel and Suarez cases and that is that Schmeichel said nothing, zero which was remotely racist or could possibly have been construed as racist which Ian Wright ultimately admitted
did he?? where is this then?
trousers
if you earn a living and reside in britain then you learn our culture aswell. any1 with half a brain knows that the word negro will never be acceptable in britain, nor should it. for suarez to use this as his defence was very weak!
Wow, so if cultural differences are acceptable that means that arranged marriages and honor killings are ok then?
Or I can racially abuse somebody in my mother tongue and it'd be acceptable?
luca , you are totally wrong about the burden of proof. The type of case that you may find in a court of law which is most analogous to this case is an employment discrimination case, for example someone is racially abused by their boss and brings a claim. The burden of proof in such cases is the balance of probabilities.
Furthermore every legal case there has ever been has been decided on a probably verdict whether that be more probably than not (most civil and employment cases) , quite probably (the Suarez case if you read the judgement, it was balance of probabilities plus) or very probably (criminal cases , beyond reasonable doubt).
RSC. If all the Liverpool officials hadn't met the police last night, you would all of been on here crying that the officials were ignoring the situation and were yet again condoning racism. Well done for proving yourself a complete hypocrite and that LFC will be in the wrong whatever they do.
Henry. Since when does 'our culture' involve all of the bigotry chanting that your club has been involved in so much?
As an aside, I had no idea that many people had been arrested at football matches for racial abuse this season.
4 at Villa?
I had no idea. Surely that would be big news.
siempre - read the FA report for christs sake. it is painful having to go over the same argument with people like you.
Suarez admitted to one use of the word which was agreed that if the FA believed his version of events, it would not be construed as racist. This is a FACT...its in the report...read it!
The FA decided that everything EVRA said about the rest of the incident was correct and that suarez used the word 7 times. this is without proof and as such they deemed this single use of the word, along with the disputed 6 other uses as racially motivated.
Why should suarez or liverpool football club admit to something that they believe did not happen. Would you admit to it if you hadnt done it?
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
terentius1 (U1863)
--
that comment was in response to lucas and his comment that the player could have misheard.
do you honestly think that senior officials at liverpool would have met the police directly after the game if the lad could have been mistaken??
you all seem to have this chip on your shoulder that the only reason people are commenting about this is because its liverpool. i couldn't care less who is involved. it is a current issue that many will feel strongly about. i'm a rangers fan and favour nor dislike any PL team
South London Manc, RSC and the assorted merry men.
IF a racist word was uttered by ONE idiot fan he deserves to be banned from every ground in the country. BUT at the moment we have no idea what was said. A complaint has been lodged by the Oxford player and 'IT IS UNDERSTOOD TO BE OF A RACIST NATURE'. Or to simplify it, The Guardian DO NOT know for definite if it is.
Re: Luis Suarez, you are painting the Suarez/Evra case to be (please excuse this expression, should it cause offence) black and white, it wasn't. If it was as simple as you claim why did it take 3 months to sort out? Why did it take linguistic experts, unseen video evidence etc etc for the panel to come to a decision? You are also cherry picking the bits you want to use. The panel found Suarez guilty, you are quick to remind us of that. The panel also said that Luis Suarez was not a racist, you conveniently ignore this.
I've seen nothing but Liverpool fans on the defensive, all day over this. Why?
Yes, if it is true a racist comment was made, we should all be ashamed of that ONE fan being associated with our club. But I'm not going to apologise for him. He's his own man, and is responsible for his own actions. My condemnation is more suitable than an apology.
South London Manc
It's obvious what your motive for creating this article was. It is about LFC. Be man enough to admit it, after all I can admit my shame and disgust about the ONE fan that may have been racist.
Sign in if you want to comment
Oldham player
Page 6 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10
posted on 7/1/12
You can tell jimmy went to Cambridge
(if you don't get it, then read the article from the start and hear SLMs audacious claim about hearing)
posted on 7/1/12
Henry
But the fact is, what happened between Suarez and Evra is a mystery. No one else heard and it was down to lip reading and gestures to come to a verdict. (did English people lip read a conversation in Spanish? If so, )
Your case would be different as I'm sure someone else would have heard.
posted on 7/1/12
I used to like liverpool, however I must say, it is in my opinion,the most racist place I have ever been to.
I worked up there for a few months not long ago and the people although friendly were a bunch of racist idiots. Not all of them but more than enough to make me not want to go back again.
posted on 7/1/12
and yet if the player had misheard what was said then nobody would have informed the police as the term would not have been racist. works both ways
---
i'm sorry but players are abused for 90 mins week in week out, they know it's part and parcel of the game, racial abuse is a no-no and for the player to react like he did is clear to me that he was racially abused. if there was any chance of mishearing do you think your chief exec, director of football, press officer and manager would meet the police and oldham directors in the tunnel after the match?
posted on 7/1/12
why is saurez any different? are the fa keen to minimise the damage done to the image of the game?
because, and it has been done to death, the FA found suarez guilty on a probably verdict.
the use of that word on the single occasion would be deemed non racist if the FA believed his version of events prior to this. they didnt and decided that he used the word another 6 times without proof based on a probable verdict.
this verdict is not used in a court of law. beyond reasonable doubt is and under that suarez would be innocent. Do you get it yet?
the continued support for suarez is how the FA can arrive at that "probable" decision when they are glaring inconsistencies in evra's account also.
No appeal was made because the "crusade" from the media made suarez public enemy no1 and allowed biffs like you licence to spout karp without knowing the facts
posted on 7/1/12
RSC. We still don't know for a fact what was said. By the way, at least one person has made a statement to the police according to reports. I have no idea what was said, but is it inconceivable that the person said 'Manc' instead of 'black' as has been reported? Its not right either way, but you're assuming that the person in question is guilty and guilty of the worst accusation at that. Not being very objective are you?
posted on 7/1/12
trousers
suarez admitted he used the word 'negro' when adressing patrice evra
posted on 7/1/12
Lucas
-----
I was on jury duty in June. And that was our insertions from the judge. To balance out the probability that the 3 boys did not commit the crime.
posted on 7/1/12
it is in my opinion,the most racist place I have ever been to.
Even though I disagree, I respect you for sayiing its in your opinion. However, most others would say it is the most racist place in the country. I'm just glad you put some realism into it.
posted on 7/1/12
SouthLondonManc. Em, yes, well, I think I'm beginning to get a handle on you, ish. Em, eh, let's see how this goes. "The sun rises in the East and sets in the West" no? Too difficult? How about, " if yer auntie had balls she'd be yer uncle" . Its a difficult world out there isn't it. JimmyTheRed
posted on 7/1/12
There is a huge difference between the Schmeichel and Suarez cases and that is that Schmeichel said nothing, zero which was remotely racist or could possibly have been construed as racist which Ian Wright ultimately admitted. From the outset everyone knew because Suarez admitted it, that he said a word which to anyone with any brain appeared to refer to the colour of Evra's skin. That is a fact however you want to spin it. The whole defence was about whether that was acceptable or not. On Evra's evidence what Suarez said was a whole lot worse and that tended to be backed up by the video ,what other witnesses said and inconsistencies in Suarez's various statements. But even if Suarez only said what he himself admitted to saying it is a whole lot worse than what Schmeichel said which was nothing at all and a complete 100% fabrication.
posted on 7/1/12
i'm sorry but players are abused for 90 mins week in week out, they know it's part and parcel of the game, racial abuse is a no-no and for the player to react like he did is clear to me that he was racially abused. if there was any chance of mishearing do you think your chief exec, director of football, press officer and manager would meet the police and oldham directors in the tunnel after the match?
are you an idiot? so you have made a judgement that there is no way the player could have misheard what was said...thats it...final!
The club have already said they are investigating, what more can they do at this stage without knowing the facts.
i sincerely hope you never get asked to go on jury duty
posted on 7/1/12
are the fa keen to minimise the damage done to the image of the game?
------------
Tbh I think they may have intensified it. I can imagine more cases like this now in the future as some players try and get players banned, especially with the high punishment of 8 games.
I'm not say it's right, but I can see this happening, as I think there are a few players out there that will do this kind of thing to get an opposition player banned, and in effect put themselves in a stronger position.
posted on 7/1/12
Henry
Yes. But do you even realise why the saga has gone on for so long?
CULTURAL DIFFERENCES! I bet most didn't even read as to why it went on for ages. Just took it as a chance to have a pop at us. But I'm sorry, I've had more hurtful pops from bubble wrap
posted on 7/1/12
There is a huge difference between the Schmeichel and Suarez cases and that is that Schmeichel said nothing, zero which was remotely racist or could possibly have been construed as racist which Ian Wright ultimately admitted
did he?? where is this then?
posted on 7/1/12
trousers
if you earn a living and reside in britain then you learn our culture aswell. any1 with half a brain knows that the word negro will never be acceptable in britain, nor should it. for suarez to use this as his defence was very weak!
posted on 7/1/12
Wow, so if cultural differences are acceptable that means that arranged marriages and honor killings are ok then?
Or I can racially abuse somebody in my mother tongue and it'd be acceptable?
posted on 7/1/12
luca , you are totally wrong about the burden of proof. The type of case that you may find in a court of law which is most analogous to this case is an employment discrimination case, for example someone is racially abused by their boss and brings a claim. The burden of proof in such cases is the balance of probabilities.
Furthermore every legal case there has ever been has been decided on a probably verdict whether that be more probably than not (most civil and employment cases) , quite probably (the Suarez case if you read the judgement, it was balance of probabilities plus) or very probably (criminal cases , beyond reasonable doubt).
posted on 7/1/12
RSC. If all the Liverpool officials hadn't met the police last night, you would all of been on here crying that the officials were ignoring the situation and were yet again condoning racism. Well done for proving yourself a complete hypocrite and that LFC will be in the wrong whatever they do.
posted on 7/1/12
Henry. Since when does 'our culture' involve all of the bigotry chanting that your club has been involved in so much?
posted on 7/1/12
As an aside, I had no idea that many people had been arrested at football matches for racial abuse this season.
4 at Villa?
I had no idea. Surely that would be big news.
posted on 7/1/12
siempre - read the FA report for christs sake. it is painful having to go over the same argument with people like you.
Suarez admitted to one use of the word which was agreed that if the FA believed his version of events, it would not be construed as racist. This is a FACT...its in the report...read it!
The FA decided that everything EVRA said about the rest of the incident was correct and that suarez used the word 7 times. this is without proof and as such they deemed this single use of the word, along with the disputed 6 other uses as racially motivated.
Why should suarez or liverpool football club admit to something that they believe did not happen. Would you admit to it if you hadnt done it?
posted on 7/1/12
Comment deleted by Site Moderator
posted on 7/1/12
terentius1 (U1863)
--
that comment was in response to lucas and his comment that the player could have misheard.
do you honestly think that senior officials at liverpool would have met the police directly after the game if the lad could have been mistaken??
you all seem to have this chip on your shoulder that the only reason people are commenting about this is because its liverpool. i couldn't care less who is involved. it is a current issue that many will feel strongly about. i'm a rangers fan and favour nor dislike any PL team
posted on 7/1/12
South London Manc, RSC and the assorted merry men.
IF a racist word was uttered by ONE idiot fan he deserves to be banned from every ground in the country. BUT at the moment we have no idea what was said. A complaint has been lodged by the Oxford player and 'IT IS UNDERSTOOD TO BE OF A RACIST NATURE'. Or to simplify it, The Guardian DO NOT know for definite if it is.
Re: Luis Suarez, you are painting the Suarez/Evra case to be (please excuse this expression, should it cause offence) black and white, it wasn't. If it was as simple as you claim why did it take 3 months to sort out? Why did it take linguistic experts, unseen video evidence etc etc for the panel to come to a decision? You are also cherry picking the bits you want to use. The panel found Suarez guilty, you are quick to remind us of that. The panel also said that Luis Suarez was not a racist, you conveniently ignore this.
I've seen nothing but Liverpool fans on the defensive, all day over this. Why?
Yes, if it is true a racist comment was made, we should all be ashamed of that ONE fan being associated with our club. But I'm not going to apologise for him. He's his own man, and is responsible for his own actions. My condemnation is more suitable than an apology.
South London Manc
It's obvious what your motive for creating this article was. It is about LFC. Be man enough to admit it, after all I can admit my shame and disgust about the ONE fan that may have been racist.
Page 6 of 10
6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | 10