suarez v evra

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
Status
Not open for further replies.
johnsonsbaby said:
Sorry to keep this going but I've just thought about this - does anybody know what the 'certain' word was? We're all presuming it was the n word - but all this 'debate' and we don't even know what 'the word' is. Somebody just said siuppose the word was 'frog' !!! Does that count as racially abusive?
Click to expand...

Well, I don't think anyone does know what the word was - which tells me Evra hasn't got a frog's leg to stand on.

Technically, I would say 'frog' is racist because of the French reportedly eating frogs legs, but that's if they can connect the association of France and frogs in negative context.

If you want to go that far, when I first met mr wishi, he joked about visiting Liverpool for the first time and asked if his hub caps would be safe! Suffice to say I didn't wave the Race Relations Act in his face, but people have done it for less.

I refuse to accept that Evra didn't give back what he reportedly got; and I'm still waiting for the proof. One of them is going to look very silly, and it won't be Suarez.
 
wishiwasinliverpool said:
Well, I don't think anyone does know what the word was - which tells me Evra hasn't got a frog's leg to stand on.

Technically, I would say 'frog' is racist because of the French reportedly eating frogs legs, but that's if they can connect the two meanings in our negative context.

If you want to go that far, when I first met mr wishi, he joked about visiting Liverpool for the first time and asked if his hub caps would be safe! Suffice to say I didn't wave the Race Relations Act in his face, but people have done it for less.

I refuse to accept that Evra didn't give back what he reportedly got; and I'm still waiting for the proof. One of them is going to look very silly, and it won't be Suarez.
Click to expand...

Hate to have you on a jury.
 
wishiwasinliverpool said:
Well, I don't think anyone does know what the word was - which tells me Evra hasn't got a frog's leg to stand on.

Technically, I would say 'frog' is racist because of the French reportedly eating frogs legs, but that's if they can connect the association of France and frogs in negative context.
.
Click to expand...


slagging off a particular piece of another nationality's culture is hardly racist. I think the crime is teh label you applied to an entire country with quite diverse cultures and most of em don't eat frogs legs:)
 
Far too much emphasis placed on the use of racist language in football, it's wrong of course, but it rates way below an airborne lunging two-footer in my book.

Sticks & Stones
 
KingEric07 said:
This seems a completely reasonable article and hardly beyond belief.
Click to expand...


If an irish player opted to play for England 30 years ago which is a fair comparison, he would be probably more than slagged off back here, and it is the same for a lot of occupied countries, there is still a lot of bitterness in Africa about the French and what they did there including but not limited to aiding genecide in Rowanda, this was right up to the late 80s not a distant past., I think the sensgalese abuse of Evra is somewhat rooted in hatred of French colonialism and plundering of the continent, that he chose the evil plundering oppressor over his own people.. maybe


Living in France so long maybe thats why Evra doesnt understand that? Certainly doesn't know his history, maybe a french version of events Evra being educated there
 
BringBackfootie said:
slagging off a particular piece of another nationality's culture is hardly racist. I think the crime is teh label you applied to an entire country with quite diverse cultures and most of em don't eat frogs legs:)
Click to expand...

Well, let's look at Irish travellers. They're protected in this country under Race Relations, which is bloody daft. In Ireland they're a social group, but they've been granted Race Relations status because of their lifestyle and 'race' - Irish, which was once part of Great Britain; and white Northern European to boot. They wave the act in your gob every chance they get. A result of soft-touch Britain IMO...

Expand on that further, and where does it leave people who live on narrow boats with a similar roaming lifestyle? Should they be protected under the Act?

Gypsies, on the other hand - REAL gypsies - should be protected under the Act because they're of Indo-European origin. Travellers aren't gypsies; they're chancers. But you can't say so...

I'm part Greek, part Irish and scouse - if a Manc called me names I could wave the Act in his or her face, but I don't. I just sock him or her on the button.
 
wishiwasinliverpool said:
If Suarez is guilty I can assure you he won't. But he's innocent until proven so, whatever you might like to think.
Click to expand...

Of course he is innocent until proven guilty. I have always said that. When have I said he was guilty before the hearing is finished?? Also even though the burden of proof is on a balance of probabilities, I don't think Suarez will be found guilty. Besides people who commit crimes are often never convicted.
 
I know I'm late coming to this, as I've been otherwise entertained...

But, let's look at this logically, the lad hardly speaks English, and he is taking lessons, and yes, team mates will try to teach him all the swear words first, but it would be a horrific state of affairs if people have been teaching him racist expressions. So I'd be surprised if he even knows the word(s).

Also from that article above... Evra's dad was 50 when he had him???? that must mean a fair amount of emotional baggage...
 
wishiwasinliverpool said:
Well, let's look at Irish travellers. They're protected in this country under Race Relations, which is bloody daft. In Ireland they're a social group, but they've been granted Race Relations status because of their lifestyle and 'race' - Irish, which was once part of Great Britain; and white Northern European to boot. They wave the act in your gob every chance they get. A result of soft-touch Britain IMO...

Expand on that further, and where does it leave people who live on narrow boats with a similar roaming lifestyle? Should they be protected under the Act?

Gypsies, on the other hand - REAL gypsies - should be protected under the Act because they're of Indo-European origin. Travellers aren't gypsies; they're chancers. But you can't say so...

I'm part Greek, part Irish and scouse - if a Manc called me names I could wave the Act in his or her face, but I don't. I just sock him or her on the button.
Click to expand...

back the **** up there mrs. it was irish before it was part of britain , before cromwell and all the settlers <grr>
 
As far as I'm aware, Ireland has never been part of Britain.
Great Britain is a geographical term used to describe the island that is made up of England, Scotland and Wales- and all the attendant small islands around the coast.

The political entity is known as The United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Before the Republic it was known as the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland.

The British Isles is again a geographical term used to describe this group of islands and named after the largest, i.e Britain. This term includes Ireland but purely in the geographical sense, not the political.
 
aswordmadeofhash said:
back the **** up there mrs. it was irish before it was part of britain , before cromwell and all the settlers <grr>
Click to expand...

OK, so it was. You forget I said I'm part Irish myself, so I don't diss the Irish, naturally. Wales was independent, so were half of what are now counties in the UK, including Cornwall, and for that matter, Scotland - where my husband's family are from - before the country was unified.

They're still Northern white Europeans and as far as I'm concerned they don't count as a separate ethnic group, but that's not what the law says. I'm using the traveller example to illustrate that racism can go deeper than just skin colour.

And not all travellers are bad people, I know that, too, but the reputation has stuck over the years.
 
saintanton said:
As far as I'm aware, Ireland has never been part of Britain.
Great Britain is a geographical term used to describe the island that is made up of England, Scotland and Wales- and all the attendant small islands around the coast.

The political entity is known as The United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Northern Ireland. Before the Republic it was known as the United Kingdoms of Great Britain and Ireland.

The British Isles is again a geographical term used to describe this group of islands and named after the largest, i.e Britain. This term includes Ireland but purely in the geographical sense, not the political.
Click to expand...

Well, there was a reason for the Irish uprising, home rule, and it goes well before the First World War. They fought and they died for independence, and they got it, except for the north. Of course I don't claim to know the ins and outs, but I do know the Irish were eligilble for conscription into the British army, and many Irish did fight during the war. I think they were considered part of the British Empire, anyway.
 
oh wow.... what is this thing still rumbling on about.

for the record you guys should go read some history books on ireland. As someone of dodgy extract i can comment. First go investigate the act of union 1801. second ask any european and the british isles means both ireland and britain as a whole. Ireland had been part of the scenario as far back as the normans, it was only in 1943 that a constituation and republic was declared. Whether you fall on one side of a line or another people have to live and get on with heach other

the fact is history is merely that. the undertones of hatred on this thread is DISGUSTING. I would appeal to some super moderator to end this rumbling debate and nastyness cos there's no reason for it.

hating travellers that your issue whomever started it, ethnic group or non ethnic group segmenting oursevels into whits or northern european v anything is wrong.

We are all human beings, we all need to respect each others traditions and be inclusive in our daily lives. That means the kick rascim out of football campaign tries to encourage young kids of all races to come together in mutal respect and have fun likcing a ball about a park.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top Bottom
Back