I really do not understand the fuss here, Suarez only referred to his colour when he was talking to him? Why are people so outraged? I doubt you'd get a 8 match ban if you called someone an "English prick" or a "manc ****". This is just another decision by white people trying to appease black people and trying to avoid the issue of the fact people actually do have different skin colours in the world.
Golly you're dense. Calling someone a "Prick" is offensive, calling someone a "<Insert skin colour here> Prick" is racist. Does Suarez refer to everyone by the colour of their skin? Does he have a little nickname for Lucas meaning "my white bitch" in Uruguayan. Is Carragher fondly referred to as "white bloke who hoofs it". No. Its like those idiots who pride themselves on being extra non racist because they have a "black friend". Good for you, but the very fact you single him out purely because of his skin colour makes you racist. Nice to see Evra is the most hated person at LFC. Guy gets racislly abused, complains and is now hated for it. Real classy fans. (FYI Mancunians/Scousers aren't races, English people aren't a race, being ginger or fat isn't a race.)
Now this is one of the stupidest counter arguments when people say 'ginger' or white isn't a race. Neither is 'black'. Black skin is a genetic trait shared by a number of 'races' just like green eyes or red hair or white skinI love the way people who think they are anti racist make the same stupid generalisations. And stop this nonsense about 'but ginger people weren't enslaved ' guess what: they were: it's why you find red hair in Africa going back 2 thousand years courtesy of the roman empire who migrated more enslaved people than any empire in history: it's ok I don't throw it in the face of Modern day Italians even though some of them are racist. It has already been discussed ad nauseam that Uruguayan people are quite descriptive when referring directly to each other: so while we can't say for definite that Suarez does call his mates whitey, blondey, shorty & big nose; the word coming out if his country is that many many of his compatriots do so maybe go ask his mates what their nicknames are. Argument 2: The term racism has never ever been a narrow definition created purely to describe the abuse of the colour of ones skin. You can argue the semantics with terms like Xenophobia all day long it's all irrelevant in this case. The only definition that matters is that given in the FA's regulations. Which includes references to colour of skin, ethnicity & nationality. So: either the FA take a literal orthodox interpretation of their rule and any mention of the above is a breach (and remember according to their own rule this part can only be added if the first rule of abuse is proved first.) which means both Evra & Suarez should receive equal punishment: that's a literal interpretation. They were arguing; they both referred to colour or nationality; they both broke the rule; (and it is a "rule" not a law people: only Her Majesty's Government can create Law & Only The Crowns Courts can apply that law.) OR the FA applies the rule in context of the situation. The FA & Evra have stated that they do not believe Suarez is racist & Suarez has denied any racist intent so they can not apply a law designed for combatting racism to punish him here. Read back there are links to quite a few black people who share this interpretation and who do not appear to be Liverpool fans. Which black person do we take our advice on this from then? The FA, Media & United supporters can not have it both ways: it's either a literal interpretation and means all mentions of a persons colour(including hair!) or references to country of birth must be punished equally or they take other things into consideration which means they have now contradicted themselves. And quite frankly I'm getting sick to death of rival fans coming on here pretending to have this moral outrage about racism when their motives are clearly about tribal football politics. You denigrate the cause, you cheapen it, you are a disgrace. Sick or not, I've had enough, it's Christmas eve, this has annoyed me enough, I'm going for a pint! Merry Christmas to everybody!
I would disagree that using a word makes you racist, to me it's all about the intent and the mentality of the person using the word. We will never know if Suarez intended to use the word in a racist context. As far as the FA goes I would say that they have to treat every situation individually and decide if there was intent or not, or if there is enough evidence to decide. I believe in this case there was not enough evidence to decide so they should not have made a judgment. Their actions have branded Suarez a racist with the size of the ban, I think this is wrong.
I read this article earlier, and I can only think it was written for the purposes of inciting a response: http://www.dailymail.co.uk/sport/football/article-2078245/Des-Kelly-When-comes-crass-protest-Kennys--got-T-shirt.html "Suarez himself admitted he made the remark, yet argued it would be considered inoffensive in his native South America. So what? Ignorance isn't a justifiable defence and saying 'little black man' is not a purely descriptive phrase, as some at Liverpool have laughably attempted to argue. It is a remark designed to belittle and demean and, in that context, it is racist language. Moreover, Suarez hasn't just stepped off a plane from Montevideo. He joined Ajax in the Dutch league in 2007 so has - or should have - a grasp of what is, and what is not, acceptable outside of South America."
He didn't call him a prick though, he just used "negro" as a way of identifying Evra with something that made him different to everyone else. For Uruguyans, and most other South Americans, its just like one of his mates in the national team getting called "El Flacco" which means skinny. No, because that isn't their unique trait? Why would you go to the effort of calling everyone by the colour? Its like going around a star wars parade calling everyone "speccy", it would be pointless, because 95% of people there would be wearing glasses, so you need something that identifies someone straight away. For Rooney, its his fat head, for Lampard its the fact he's fat and for Peter Crouch its the fact he's lanky. The fact is, in this country, for some reason, you are allowed to refer to nationality, looks, weight, height, accent but when you comment on the fact someone has dark skin colour then everyone kicks off. Why? Whats the difference exactly? Everyone one of them is discrimination against something someone can't help, but only one is a taboo and the others are absolutely fine. No, it really doesn't. Being racist would mean you have a hatred for black people in general regardless of who they are and what they've done, that isn't the case with most people, in reality there's only a small amount of people that are properly racist. There's a difference between a racist comment, and being a racist, and even then Suarez isn't guilty of either of those things. He's hated because he's a cocky little gobshite.
Maybe Evra should also be handed a 8 match ban then, as what he allegedly said to Suarez was called him a "sudaca" which is actually an offensive term for South Americans in Spanish. Why is Evra being let off scot free, while Suarez is being punished? Seeing as Evra actually knew what he was doing trying to wind him up, while Suarez was merely talking to him?
If true, it's probably because he denied the offence. And if he's been let off purely because of that, it's absolutely absurd.
see the following meaning given to sudaca SUDACA is a derogatory term used in Spain to refer to Latinos, meaning “dirty southerner”.
I'm just fed up with all of these self righteous berks crawling out of the woodwork professing their moral indignation over something I bet most of them don't even give a toss about normally, their newly discovered moral compass giving them yet another stick to beat us with. The majority wouldn't give a rat's knackers over anything Luis Suarez did or said if he didn't play for us (or another perceived rival) and none except Man U fans would normally leap to the defence of Patrice Evra. I'm actually starting to feel sorry for Evra in a strange way, whom I suspect is just a sad little man with low self-esteem who sees insults everywhere he goes and probably didn't expect this to turn into the overblown farce it has become. Any one of these posters or journos who are using a very grave and sensitive issue to score personal points, for whatever reason, they are the ones who should be ashamed. As far as I'm concerned they can shove their false piety up their outraged backsides. Oh by the way, Merry Christmas everyone.
What the issue has done is expose the ignorance of other cultures, which is prevalent both in the British media and the general public. In some countries we'd be arrested for holding hands with our wife, and you can bet your house that the press would be criticising that country's laws should that happen. We need to realise the world doesn't revolve around Europe and North America. Unfortunately we live in such a time where that isn't the case, and so the press are getting away with saying whatever they want about Uruguay and other South American nations. Fair enough, claim that Suarez should know better, but don't attack his entire culture. They should also tailor the ban to suit this. Maybe a warning, a 3 match ban (red card) and 5 suspended. They're making the crime fit the punishment, not the other (correct) way around.
Negrito - English meaning: Anthropology A member of any of various peoples of short stature inhabiting parts of Malaysia, the Philippines, and southeast Asia. This meaning is teh english one and has to be the only one teh FA can use as the SA one is friendly and could not possibly be took as an attack Can't see how this is racist to someone from an entirely different part of the world. South american meaning: Little black friend\pal. Emphasis on 'Pal' Neither term is offensive and neither is in anyway a racist term. Evra actually abused Suarez. Fergie has the balls to say Luis racially abused Evra when even the FA verdict didn't say that. Barnes was right, most of these twats didn't even know what constituted racism 20 years ago and now 20 years later, they still don't know
I'm currently at Uni and have taken a module in Anthropology. One of the topics every week is the shortfall of language to describe what we see in other cultures, and also how many of their terms cannot be directly translated.
and the FA criticise FIFA for corruption, hypocritical bastards, they have their heart set on making a point its like suarez is guilty till proven innocent, im pretty sure thats not how the process is meant to go. He is clearly being targeted by the FA and many tabloids, i think the only paper i have seen not automatically label him racist is the Mirror, ****ing scum our press, i cannot stand them
You make some very good points here saint. Being away from the 'heat' of it, has helped me see the ludicrous hypocracy of both the FA, the media and the race relations industry (for that is what it has become) in general. Whilst it will be difficult to divorce the race issues from the fight for 'common justice' in the Suarez appeal, this is where the legal team have to concentrate. The appeal is not going to change the FA processes or the attitudes/politics by itself. The media will not change it's stance nor the opposition fans - so don't even try and seek solace there! It's Boxing Day morning here and we are all recovering from yesterday so let's hope tonight (for us) we can get the tonic we need from Blackburn.
Plus, the fact that we're debating it so heavily (not just the punishment, but the offence itself) suggests that it is anything but a clear cut issue. Therefore it is not one that the FA should have chosen to 'throw the book at'.
That's why I will NEVER buy a newspaper, under any circumstances. If I want news, I've got the Internet/TV/Radio/Phone
