So what I can't say that Suarez made racist comments or that how Liverpool have handled the situation has been a disgrace? Ok then how about this: I can't believe that some Pool fans are still trying to deny that Buck Teeth was racist . He is a good player (although a **** finisher) but he is scum and made racist remarks. How Pool football club and some of their fans have dealt with this has been moronic.
Don't want to get into an argument, take a look at some of the posts from mancs, the mods here are not deleting everything that doesn't fit the way we see things. However when you start slagging off our fans and club your posts will be deleted. I don't think that's unfair this is a board for Liverpool fans after all. I'll leave your post for now but may remove it depending on the reaction.
Suarez was judged on the same basis as all other footballers in the UK. Rio got an eight month drugs ban on the basis of balance of probability, and Keane and Vinnie Jones were banned based on comments made in books and videos which would never have stood up in a criminal court. Or should Liverpool be treated differently from everyone else?
Hmmmmm. It did not say that. Said "damaged the image of English football around the world". Big difference.
This is a football forum and one that was made to let people comment and debate "freely", so just because I criticised a player that has been found to of made racist comments and a club that in my opinion has handle the situation in a bad way, it does not warrant my comments to be deleted. By all means you can disagree with them and argue that I am wrong, but not just delete them.
There are no set rules for the way I mod the Liverpool board I'll do what I think is right, if you call our club a disgrace I will delete your post, I think I've been fair at the moment. Others are on here and are debating evidence but they are not just making remarks about the club or player.
No offence but deleting posts that criticise your club is a tad pathetic, especially seeing as I was not technically calling the club a disgrace, just how they have handled the situation. I have read most of the report and it does seem like Suarez made racist comments to Evra so deserves criticism as does the club in the manner they have handled it.
We'll have to agree to disagree. As I said I'll call it as I see it I don't have to justify myself to you.
This is the case in all legal cases that do not involve a criminal court. Divorce and acess cases, financial compensation claims, industrial tribunals, private prosecutions etc all go with "balance of probability" not beyond "all reasonable doubt". Suarez deserved his punishment for his behaviour (not for being racist which Evra did not accuse him of). The club would be ill advised to appeal. I can see the ban extended to 10 weeks quite rightly for frivolous appealing in the light of the submissions from both. Oh really? We'd be better off BOTH of them going to a criminal court. There are at least as many inconsistencies and contradictions in Evra's report, but his 'demeanour' is judged more reliable than Suarez (giving his evidence in a language he barely speaks). Their whole case rests upon the intent in the finger-pinching episode, and thus a presumption that what Suarez said could not be have been used in a 'concilitary' sense (and they even bring the act that Suarez used the word 'concilitary' against hi, as he is said to have read it in a report by the language specialists!. A half decent QC would rip that to shreds! As it stands, if Liverpool accept this agenda-driven diatribe it would only take another two Martin Luther Ferguson - inspired uncollobarated, inconsistent, contradictary allegations from either his own black players or to get compliant arselickers such as Allardyce, Moyes and Ken to do it for him (and doubless a favourable loan of a promising Utd fringe player to follow) for Suarez's career to be over. A man's livelihood, not just his reputation is at stake. If this is allowed Ferguson and his corrupt cronies at the FA can pick off every opposition player of threat with just and unsubstantiated slur whenever they wish - watch out Silva, Van Persie, Mata, Bale, Gerrard plus any other non-black player Ferguson may feel he wants eliminated. And all done under the cloak of anti-racism! If Liverpool don't react to this they'd be leaving their player to twist in the wind. Don't forget either thatthese 'wise' counsels offering their piffle on Sunday Supplement and so forth are the same ones who jumped on the bandwagon and crucified us immeadiately after Hillsborough for breaking down the gates and pissing on brave coppers. They've painted themselves into a corner over their initial reaction after the verdict last month, and whatever that report said the Lawtons, Kellys, Ladyboys et al were always going to say it vindicated their anti-Liverpool agenda.
I read through this document and I'll tell you why I believe this is witch hunt. If the panel are to believed this document should have been one page thick; They state right at the beginning that they will only view the use of the words used in an objective not subjective manner. So intent doesn't matter. Suarez admitted using the word: on standard set by panel above he's guilty. Fair enough. Why then does the panel go to great pains to set out how "unreliable" Suarez evidence was? Shouldn't matter, you aren't accepting "intent" , he's admitted using the word; guilty. "Evra was more believable" doesn't matter, irrelevant to your standard, Suarez admitted using the word. Evra doesn't need to be more reliable. Experts gave or didn't give expert opinion: irrelevant. Suarez admitted using the word: guilty. The reason all this rubbish is in here is because the FA are NOT confident of just taking the "objective" stance when it goes to court of arbitration so laughingly muddy their own judgement with this spurious nonsense. The whole document says " we can't prove he's a racist so officially we can't say he's a racist (because we might get sued for libel) but by the way we think he's a racist. If they'd just bloody stuck to the objective argument on use of the word, given Suarez a 4 match ban then I would have no complaints. I might have thought they'd created a rod for their back in future but I'd have believed it was an even handed decision as long as applied to everyone else (Evra???Pacheco???) This document however showed what weak spined cowards the FA are; trying to placate everybody rather than just adjudicate. This will go to Switzerland. Edit; oh and the biggest nonsense? Evra says 10 times but we don't believe him; Suarez says 1 time, we don't believe him: We'll take the median so we can use it as a pseudo fact and use it as an excuse to double his ban to placate minority pressure groups, and p*ss off Blatter. Also will be Terry's out: I predict Terry will (irrespective of the court case) get same fine as Suarez but only 4 game ban for just saying it 'once'
DirtyFrank. It is open and shut in terms of his guilt, as the FA expressed in their report. However it was important to establish the intent and extent of the abuse to establish the appropriate punishment. For example the violent conduct charge carries a minimum two game ban but on several occasions it has been increased due to the nature of the offence. You will also notice that Evra's "unreliable" evidence is only given in the comments he made during immediately after the game, whereas Suarez has had to backtrack and concede that his evidence has been unreliable at every stage. Perhaps if Suarez held his hands up apologised and didn't attempt to knowingly skew his version of events the FA may have seen more reason to go easy on him but as it stands Suarez has made it impossible for them to take his word on anything. The most embarrassing thing to come out of this situation is that both Liverpool club and fans have jumped to the protection of Suarez at every stage despite not knowing the full facts. Finally when the full facts have become available not one of you can take off your rose tinted specs and stop jumping to the wrong conclusions at every twist and turn. This matter is a bit more serious than Manchester United vs Liverpool so perhaps your fans should not be reading the document simply looking to pick fault but rather trying to understand why Suarez was found guilty.
hey guys .... ive been a suarez supporter since this thing broke out , but after the evidence came out proper , i have a hard time being a supporter of suarez now if that it true .. what planet is this guy on ....and does he realise he tarnished our great club so bad that people are calling us "klan-field" and "ku klux kop" i know that i am probably gonna get pelters by people on here for saying this but maybe the club needs to realise that we are bigger than one player im disgusted at the way people are labelling the club and supporters as racists
No it isn't. Had you read the report, its actually based on probability, not factual evidence. That means it wouldn't stand a chance in a real court unlike the FA's kangaroo court. There are massive holes in the FA's logic, and if its possible to take this matter to a proper court of law, then you can put a lot of money on it that Liverpool will be doing exactly that.
I must admit I'm not happy in the way our image has been damaged by one bloke, but I havent read the full report. Personally I am sick of it. It's need to be sorted so we can move on.
You do realise that wasn't proved? It's what Evra said he said and seems slightly weird or Suarez to say so randomly and unprovoked. Suarez' version was that he was called a sudac and he replied saying 'porque, negro?'. The panel then sided with Evra on balance of probability. As fans we're free to choose which set of events seem most likely. But for me, what the FA say (with absence f proof) has little say on my opinion
The fact that what suarez said contradicts what kuyt said suggests he is lying Liverpool and suarez are better off accepting the charge and apologizing.
