It's been widely reported that both Evra and the FA have made clear that they do not think he is racist. He is charged of making a racial remark, not of being racist. There is a difference.
in the same way negrito and ****** are different.
It's been widely reported that both Evra and the FA have made clear that they do not think he is racist. He is charged of making a racial remark, not of being racist. There is a difference.
It's been widely reported that both Evra and the FA have made clear that they do not think he is racist. He is charged of making a racial remark, not of being racist. There is a difference.
Seriously, when did this happen? There would be NO case if it had. Utter nonsense.
And if you think that being called a '****ing immigrant' by a Chelsea groundsman is NOT racism then, again, you need to take a look at yourself.
in the same way negrito and ****** are different.
Do you know what context is? "Yid" in my name is clearly a reference to the team I support, Tottenham, or the "Yid Army" put into a pun about a famous punk rocker. If I talked about "a ***got of sticks" would you also take that out of context and call me homophobic?
I wasn't having a pop at your grammar, unlike some, I have no problem with a more relaxed style of writing and spelling but when you're making an articulate point it's best to write it appropriately, because I couldn't make head nor tail of that.
Yeah, like friend and padre are different.
It's a different bloody language, means the same thing though.
The case was whether Suarez had racially abused Evra, not whether he was a racist. Evra and the FA have conceded that they don't believe Suarez is a racist
That as may be. I agree there is a difference. It still doesn't condone making the comment.
Lil Jatt and Sky, you obviously hvae different intrepretations of what has been made available to the public, and your views have been expressed more than clearly. To me it seems that both of you have taken each others comments out of proportion and have misunderstood a couple things as well. Its starting to get quiteannoying so if you want to argue about that can you do it somewhere else (e.g. private messages) please, as it has stopped being about Suarez.

Sorry about that. It just ****s me off when people have a dig at me about my views and then take the moral high-ground making out they know everything about a topic we all know very little about.
The case was whether Suarez had racially abused Evra, not whether he was a racist. Evra and the FA have conceded that they don't
believe Suarez is a racist
I don't even know where to start with this, so I won't.
Irrelevant, he's not charged with being a racist.
having a word & get away with warning !! FA and media keep repeating racism implication over and over , players don't need a reminder, you need sometimes harsh punishment to make the player escaped, if X player get away with warning, another player will refuse to get punished, stating why they escaped? which mean we need to wait until next JT or Suarez make racial comments .. sure they will not do, but that will not stop other players, who expect only warning after all before receiving a real punishment.
That's nowhere near the point I was making. I was in no way defending him (although you seem to have tarred us all with the same brush tonight) but merely stating the differences in accusations.
It's massively refreshing that you've taken this stance and not assumed like all your fellow fans that he is innocent 'because Kenny says so'.
A racist is a racist, whatever shirt he wears and considering the amount of black players Liverpool have had through the years that should dawn on everyone.

The people criticising/attacking Suarez so freely based on the severity of his ban which therefore must have been based on solid evidence seem to be overlooking the fact that NO football club in the UK would even consider making the statement Liverpool made without having their own solid belief that the incorrect ruling was made. Liverpool would never make such a bold statement if they weren't confident in their position because of the massive fallout it would have. Of that, i'm certain. Therefore, if Liverpool are confident in their stance, I'm confident in them and thus, confident in Suarez.
I'm not going to give my personal opinion of Suarez, however I really can't see Liverpool responding the way they are without some SERIOUS belief that they are in the right.
Consider also that the FA are shown to have zero credibility with the Rooney-ban fiasco whereby they are effectively saying that violent conduct is acceptable and will be appealed if it suits them. They need to save face and Suarez's incident comes along at a perfect time to shoulder that topic away...
I think they're making a scapegoat out of Suarez on very limited and dubious evidence (one mans word against another would never be considered evidence, especially from such an uncredible source as Evra due to past accusations and his comments to the referee).
If there is solid proof that shows he's a racist, I would gladly kick him out the club and not give him a second thought. But Liverpool's reaction convinces me that he and the club are in the right.

Irrelevant, he's not charged with being a racist.
Oi I don't presume he's innocent because Kenny says so anymore than you presume he's guilty just because Evra says so. The point here is that most of us would like to know exactly what the FA have based their judgement on and IF as Liverpools statement implies it was simply one mans word against the other do you think that should be enough to convict a man and ruin his reputation?
In fairness to the majority of Liverpool fans, plenty on here have said that if the evidence against Suarez is 100% clear cut then he can go **** himself (and trust me he deserves 8 games and to get ****ed off if he was truly being racist) but at the moment all we have to go on is the length of ban and Liverpools (very very strongly worded) statement about it. Do you really expect us to sit back and say "well the FA never ****s things up do they, so it must be true"?![]()