An article regarding the mass media's view on racism, comparing two cases. One being Top Gear, one of our countries biggest media institutions shows, and the other being the Suarez case. Interesting reading! http://newsframes.wordpress.com/2012/01/06/media-on-racism-churnalism/
Very good article. Exactly why I haven't bought a newspaper for about 3 years - absolute load of ****. Just watch the news with real reporters and news and not made up **** to sell their product.
Very interesting article. There were so many inconsistencies in the report it truly is shocking. I really don't know why SUarez and his advisors didn't challenge some of the 'findings'. I know they couldn't challenge the verdict, only the ban and that would have been useless - but surely they could have put together a complaint about the awful conclusions drawn. I had a look yesterday at the tackle on Evra that apparently started the whole argument off. Suarez was deemed to have kicked Evra in the knee, and he was 'still in shock' 5 minutes later - really!! Looking at the video Suarez didn't kick his knee and didn't even raise his foot. Evra play acted the whole thing. Can't believe the panel let so much rest on a non-existent injury. Also why didn't the club challenge these made-up facts?
http://newsframes.wordpress.com/2012/01/23/media-on-racism-framing/ Second part of the article - its the most interesting part if you're interested in the Evra-Suarez thing...
I'm still ploughing through some of the references in this but it seems that the panel of linguistic experts agreed mostly with Suarez, but the FA chose to interpret their findings according to its own self-serving agenda.
http://tomkinstimes.com/2012/01/the-suarez-decision-lfc-grounds-for-appeal/ And for some further reading on the issue - this is a lawyer's analysis of the FA report...
please log in to view this image And for those who interpret images - Suarez in a conciliatory pose (as dismissed as "simply incredible" by the panel)
It's been claimed that "the report reveals in forensic detail" and that it "has brought a new meaning to the word transparency" but it is belied by its summary of the key findings. Here are the first two: 1. The question is simply whether the words or behaviour are abusive or insulting. It is not necessary that the alleged offender intends his words or behaviour to be abusive or insulting. 2. Mr Suarez's use [of the word negro] was not intended as an attempt at conciliation or to establish rapport; neither was it meant in a conciliatory or friendly way. It was not explained by any feeling that a linguistic or cultural relationship had been established between them. These two findings are totally contradictory. If the question is "simply" one of whether certain words were used, it does not matter what the motive, or sentiments behind them were; if the latter do matter, then the question is not "simply" one of whether certain words were used. This is not the 'forensic exactitude' that some have claimed.
I watched top gear last night, it being reputedly in china... they were quite stereotypical. The bbc maintain this type of show is comedy to some extent. obviously suarez needed to luagh while he pinched evra and made out it was all a joke. top gear gets away withtti despite complaints cos some rationality exists and the fact that the beeb can't afford to lose top gear to sky.... obviously if clarkson called any british person something by race then there'd be an issue... unless of course is a reference to welsh or scots which is deemed fine seeing they are white of course... In the end guys suarez said something. I don't belwive for one minute he said everything that evra said he did nor do i find the sainthood given evra by said judgement fitting but there you go... fight it with the fa cos suarez didn't.. guy has a track record of wummery on the pitch, he went too far and piad for it. We bought him knowing this track reocrd so now he's got to accept it and play better.
http://static.ibnlive.in.com/ibnlive/pix/sitepix/10_2011/evra_suarez.jpg Here's the tackle on the knee.
mito, I don't think any of us has ever maintained Suarez is an angel. He's obviously out to wind opponents up whenever he can (he's certainly not alone in this). But that is a long way from actively being a racist, and this is what he's been branded as, and the more I read about it the more my initial feeling of a real injustice having been done is reinforced. After all, this is a slur that he carries with him for the rest of his life, not just on a football pitch. He's accepted his ban, served it, and in football terms we now move on- but that doesn't mean we ever have to accept the FA's verdict as accurate or fair.
If i was Suarez who believes himself to be innocent i'd take this case to the civil courts at the end of the season so that all the evidence becomes available and all legal aspects that were not relevant to the FA inquiry are met. He can do that or live with the racist stigma bestowed on him by Evra who changed his story of the incident more than once.
The FA are in real danger of introducing a system of racialised justice. It's very questionable that a racial insult is automatically twice as offensive as, or worthy of twice the punishment of, any other. The fact that Evra went unpunuished means it is clear that we live under a regime of racial justice. There's plenty of abuse and violent behaviour on the pitch but when was the last time a footballer was fined and banned for 8 matches? To make it only so for racial offences makes it as discriminating as the 'crime' they are trying to punish.
I agree that while the report buries a statment at the end in conclousion that suarez was not a racist the whole thing labels him as one and also unreliable and a liar. it is very clear that certain lfc parties were very shoddy in what they said and second handedly gave the ref for example and also that while the pinch verse reconciliation didn't marry they were mixed up in the timing. i still believe he said something though. i don't beleive he can take anything to any court whiel he plays in england, only if he moves cos there's no way you could have him playing in fa competitions whhile effectively sueing either evra or the fa. simple. Jb... the law is clear in the report, they passed it and nobody challenges it so it must be ok. if you are abusive you can be arrested, and it doesn't need to be racist... i'm not sure how the police would determine whats abusvie enough to arrest someone other than maybe singing about killing them or something but there you go. for the record, 6 match banwas worst impsoed at one time and that was on di canio for slight push on a ref who made the most of it canona got months and rio got months for other types of offenses that are a bit different and can't be compared. the lesson form them is if you take your punishment and come back and prove yourself you will be fine... i'd have thought beckhams case would prove this also. Suarez took his punishment now he needs to prove himself worthy of the jersey and step up to the plate... its up to him to take whatever abuse comes his way.
I have a concern that Suarez won't be treated the same as Eric or Rio - Racist is a nasty, emotive label, and tends to stick in a manner that Rapist and ***** tend to do. You'll also get nuts reacting to that label. This is my concern. They won't bother reading the report...
His employers are LFC not the FA and if he feels they walked all over his rights and dismissed his evidence as untrue/lies which left him branded as a racist he'd have every right to sue, and if he takes Mr Evra to court in a private prosecution neither LFC or MUFC are involved. I agree the ethics and inner workings of the game point to him not suing anyone but just saying i would.
MITO - the Cantona and Rio cases are different because it wasn't player-on-player offence. Evra abused Suarez but got off. They both referred to nationality or colour in their remarks and as you rightly say the law is clear in the report - which backs me up when I say Evra should also have been punished under the same law - he wasn't - only the 'race' remark was punished, -ergo racialised justice!
PMK - I agree with you tht Suarez should persue the case in a law court. He won't though will he? He already admitted to what he said and I don't think he would have done that if he thought it was wrong. You also have to look at what he said he 'wouldn't use the word negro on the football field in England again' - this to me shows that he still doesn't think using the word is wrong or wouldn't he have said he wouldn't use the word anywhere in this country again - not just on the football field.
1) not all scottish and selsh people are white. 2) this was an issue between two non white people...a big deal was made of suarez having a black grandfather. 3) please stop implying that white people are being treated worse than non white people....this was a row on the pitch there are differing opinions on the oucome but it is NOT a sign of white people losing out...I am not accussing you of having an agenda i just do not think it helps.
The OP is right. I am sick of discussing this issue. No matter how learned the criticism of the FA panel or Evra's testimony nothing is going to change. The FA, the media and the majority of commentators have their own agenda which has little or nothing to do with the facts of this case. We can talk all we want but nothing is going to change. As supporters all we can do is ensure that Suarez continues to believe that, for us, he will Never Walk Alone.
