I agree to an extent, but you also have to consider what was said itself. Like I said above, you can take offence and claim almost anything is racist, but there would still be a difference between calling someone an overtly racist term and using a general term that was taken offensively. Besides which, isn't Suarez' whole defence that he didn't take the South American thing offensively, and hence his response was also not meant to be offensive?
Hmmm, another one sided viewpoint there...you seem to have forgotten Rio getting charged for elbowing a Hull player after Gerrard got away with elbowing both Welbeck and Brown...
Surely based on KPR logic that would make him as bitter as Mark Robins?
And like I said above - he "saved SAF's job" (if I had a penny for everyone who claimed to have done that), and LFC saved Wrexham when he was in charge. So there doesn't seem to be any bias towards either side there - if anything the presence of Smith will help keep the whole thing calm and try to find a way out that is fair to both clubs.Mmm...spacktard...good comeback
And that's a pretty poor argument if you're trying to use it in this case, cos Suarez didn't say the rest of the sentence in Spanish, and wasn't talking to a fellow Spanish speaker.
a) is obviously worse. It's a common principle of law that actually committing a crime is much worse than a false accusation. Prisons aren't full of people who falsely accused someone else of committing crimes, are they?
