So Liverpool lawyers state that Evra admitted to making the remarks? Which remarks did he admit to saying? Did he himself actually admit it? Where is it written? When you actually provide the evidence, I will read it. Once you have done that then I would stop the insults. Back up what you say or stop spouting ****, prick!
This ^ Dirty horrrible french twat gives fungus just the ammo he needs to pull his well-connected FA strings and nail Liverpool FC. Filthy manipulative c..t.
You're going down in my estimation with this utter **** Red. Suarez has admitted what he said and been punished accordingly, you really should have been on here last night as there was some excellent debate raging and it didn't lower itself to level you just posted above. Well, one or two did but they were largely ignored. If Evra had said what you are all wildly counter claiming then he himself would also have had the book thrown at him. I believe that Suarez, in initially denying what he had said and then using the 'it's ok in Uruguay' defence shot himself in the foot. He should have admitted he said what he said in the heat of the moment and apologised. No amount of semantics will change that what he said IS racist towards a black man and he has been rightly punished. I expect it to be reduced on appeal to something more reasonable.
Racism is not just what you say but also how you say it and the context. In it's literal translation, Suarez is seen to be racist. But because of the way the word is used in his native country in that it is a term of endearment rather than an insult, and I also believe he didn't use it maliciously, I don't think it was a racial slur towards Evra. I think a lot of questions will be answered once the Commission releases the report. Should Liverpool continue to appeal, then that would suggest that there is a lack of evidence to punish Suarez as severely as they did. 8 matches for racist language is fully justifiable in my opinion as it sends out a strong message. However, this is a not a black or white case (pardon the pun) as there cultural differences to consider as well context and lack of evidence etc. If Terry was given 8 matches for his racist outburst which was caught on cameras, and he has no excuses as he knows what it is and isn't acceptable in this country, then the punishment fits the crime. Unfortunately, Suarez is the first case since the Blatter gaffe and the FA need to be seen as making exampls of guilty players.
This is the bit where we all largely disagree. You 'Pool fans take his word for it that it's used as a term of endearment in Uruguay while we United fans find it impossible to believe that he would use this term of endearment ten times in Evra's face during the heat of a Liverpool v United match. I know which I believe frankly. Similarly, if a black man says 'Yo ******' (or something) to a fellow black man it isn't the same as a non black man referring to a black man as a ****** in a derogative manner. I can't agree that Suarez has said this in a friendly way and I guess neither do the FA. We've all said stuff in the heat of the moment and regretted it. He's got a harsh ban, if the FA reduce on appeal that should be enough. Indeed the FA are making an example and they should do likewise to Terry if proven to be guilty.
I would take that further and say anything that the media might pick up on is asking for trouble. The FA has shown that they are more concerned with their media image and appearing to be tough than they are with being fair. True, but like I said in another thread, the FA aren't banning him for being racist. They are banning him for using a term that can be construed racist. They obviously want to cultivate a zero tolerance, no interpretation approach to these types of comments. Which is harsh on Suarez, because as with Rooney swearing they have effectively invented the rules as they go along, but I think in the long run it will be better if they can consistently stick to the rule, as it will eliminate any confusion. But this of course depends on them being consistent... As was said above, Evra would probably report it to the club for a internal disciplinary hearing. If he really took offence, the issue would probably end up with one of the players leaving the club, but like you say no one can be sure.
It's a ****ing saying and term used for any black person in a non racist way (negro/negrito). The same way I say 'calm the **** down mate' to an uppity guy in a pub even though hes not my mate. Suarez should have known better but then the FA should get a grip, how can they ban someone so harshly for an ambiguous comment without evidence and when both the fa themselves and evra have denied that Suarez is actually a racist.
Black and white people alike use negro/negrito in Hispanic countries. The n word is vastly different and actually has a harsh and derogatory historical derivation far beyond just calling someone black.
Unfortunately, we have no understanding on language in Uruguay. If you take the literal translation, then yes it is the equivalent of going up to random guy in the street and saying 'what's up, black man?'. Translating between two languages is very difficult as they have different meanings and connotations. I agree in that the literal translations is a racist insult and 8 matches is a strong but fair punishment. However, the confusion lies in the connoations and the cultural differences. Also, there is no evidence that it was used 10 times during the match. In fact there is not much evidence that Suarez said anything at all (apart from Suarez himself which should be commended for his honesty - again this unconfirmed). Apparantly Evra referred to Suarez as a South American before Suarez insulted Evra. Now, if this was true, should Evra be punished?
It was in the ref's report and Evra also admitted using racist comments in in an objectionate term - I guess when the evidence report is issued and made public, the united fans will be asking for the 'Proof' still. I fail to see how this is all one sided, I'm not defending what Suarez did, if he was using the term in a derogatory manner but, the Evra statement needs looking at - Two wrongs don't make a right they should both be thoroughly investigated. Let's be honest, it's not the first time Evra has played the race card, and it certainly won't be the last either which will have to be acted upon by the FA everytime now! I can see this one coming out of the top drawer at least once a month (Or more often if Utd are on the wrong end of a good result. I for one can't wait for the evidence to be made public so we can see how the FA came to the decision they did. I know this has been said before but, if this has been decided on the word of one man against another, I can't see how the charge could have been brought about let alone stick!
Agreed. Liverpool should take some responsibility for explaining this stuff isn't acceptable in our game. The FA will I'm sure reduce this on reflection. This has been alleged and I've no idea why it wasn't used as a counter claim if it were true. It probably isn't and is likely to be hearsay. It isn't like they've had no time to thoroughly investigate the whole affair.
As mentioned previously, we must all wait until the report is released and we can see the evidence that was used. Also, according to the LFC statement AND if they appeal, there is a strong indication that they have a case.
I can see where you are coming from, but then if the uppity guy was black and you said "calm the **** down, black man", I think you'd get a much stronger response than if you used "mate". You're always on quite shaky ground when you use a term that refers only to one race - why feel the need to single that race out? If you were talking to a white man I doubt you'd say "calm the **** down, white man". Was it actually in the ref's report? Haven't seen that mentioned anywhere, only that he allegedly said it, with no source for the allegations.
So any proof? RE: To the coward moderator who deleted my comment, atleast do a good job of it and remove the quote in the reply
Andrew Marriner added it to his report after Evra and Fungus went to see him after the match! When the evidence is released we'll see, but as I have said previously, it'll still be doubted and you guys will still be asking to 'See the proof!' Evra accepted he made comments of a racist nature and I doubt Liverpool would make this kind of claim public if this didn't make their case more solid. It'll be interesting to see the reaction both players get once this has all been settled once and for all - Given Evra' track record. I think what we have now is opened floodgates for him to use the 'Race card' again and again and again - Sad thing is, the FA have set a precedent for this to happen and be acted upon. With regards to making similar comments towards a white man, this happens daily, weekly etc...I get called Paddy for my Irish descent but this is not taken in any other way than as a joke. Welsh get called Taffy's etc, some take it personally whilst others take it as a joke - Racism shouldn't be tolerated but, it's got to be a standard that no one calls someone byu those names or everyone is ok to do it! Maybe one day Evra will let his football do the talking and not wind up his opponents and constantly try to deceive the referee as he does at present week in week out.
Swarbs is absolutely right with this lovely piece of Irony. Every time a player swears on the pitch and is directing a comment to a player or referee, they are breaking FA Rule E3 (1) so should be appropriately punished. After all that is using offensive words... No ****ing chance that will be applied, however. No consistency...
Considering the two players involved this can be aimed at Suarez a hell of a lot more than it can with Evra.
Called him a south American. Ironic really as that has little racist connotation to us but a 'sudac' as abbreviated in Spanish is hugely derogatory to a south American and is used an in insult to immigrants in Spain.
