F.A. Hypocritical ****ers

Yes and when the prosecution have a video of you committing the criminal offence your charged with your not innocent.

please log in to view this image

​D'OH!

 

If JT is guilty I will condemn him not condone him like the scousy gypos do.

 

Are you wumming my Chelsea members Page?

 

Nope just posting a bit of modern art.

 

Art

 

Tell it to Stevie G's DJ...

 

Ar Hay Swarbs he hit the DJ in pre-self defence.

Stevie G "I thought he was going to hit me your honour so i hit hit back first"

 

"Evra's initial complaint was based on his belief that the word "negro" translated to "negre" in French, which means "nigger" in English. As soon as the error of his translation was pointed out he accepted this and, to his credit, testified to the FA that he thus didn't believe Suarez was racist. He also did not admit racially abusing Suarez - he claims he said "why did you kick me?" rather than "don't touch me you South American".

To be honest, I believe that he did say "don't touch me you South American", as that just seems more plausible in light of the whole conversation. But then with the contradictions over what Suarez said ("don't touch me you negro" vs "why negro") and the fact Suarez initially stated he was trying to calm Evra down before later admitting he was winding him up counted against Suarez a lot in this area.

I reckon if Suarez had stuck to the original story, that he told Kuyt, Commoli and Dalglish - that Evra called him South American and he responded with "because you are black?" the DC would either have punished both players or let them both off with a warning. But with Suarez changing his story on fairly crucial points it counted strongly against him and shifted the balance of probability in the eyes of the DC. At that point, they realised it would create more problems with media and public perception to acquit him that to punish him. Maybe not the best way to judge a hearing like this, but then since when has football justice ever been based on absolute fairness? Suarez is hardly the first player to be convicted after media pressure and in an effort for the FA to look tough..."



Nice to see someone actually wanting to have a decent discussion about this. A few of the comments you make go against what was in the report.

Evra claimed he thought the Spanish for 'black' was 'nero' (which is the Italian for black) and when Suarez said negro he thought it was the 'n' word. I didn't see any reference to the French word you mention.

I'm not sure where you got 'don't touch me negro' from - there's no mention at all of this.

I noticed someone said before about Evra being coached and you queried this. In my view the coaching was done with Evra being talked through video footage on 3 different ocassions with his advisors/lawyers. Suarez was not given time to do the same - this is found right at the beginning of the report when it is explained that Evra had given his statement (with video help and advisor present) and as the panel wanted both men to have the 'advantage' of their side of the story being given on the same day, Suarez was called in late in the day to give his first statement - having not viewed video so everything in his first statement is from memory alone.

There's little doubt that trying to remember something from several weeks previous would not be recounted accurately by him and that to me is a fair enough reason why he couldn't remember things exactly in the right order as they happened. When he pinched Evra for example he couldn't recall the exact moment, was it by the corner flag or in the penalty box. When he said it was by the corner flag the panel ruled this as unreliable because they watched the video and knew the moment when the pinch occured. When Suarez then said it may have been after the foul because that was when Evra had said 'don't touch me South American' and the pinch was his attempt to say 'I will touch you when I want' - which seems logical to me, it was seen again as inconsistent. Someone has said not to touch them and he's saying in effect you're not untouchable - I'm not arguing that the pinch was ok just that I understand in context why he did it.

Then there’s this picture http://sport.uk.msn.com/football/suarez-ban-ridiculously-harsh-ian-wright (I’m not posting the story just look at the picture – I haven’t worked out yet how to post a picture on this site!) That to me looks quite conciliatory – and I’m not saying they weren’t both winding each other up as well – but it is photo evidence to back up some of what Suarez says.

The panel put great store in the ‘foul’ that started the whole thing off. That Evra was ‘still in shock 5 minutes after the foul’ is incredible for a couple of reasons. The first being that Suarez did not ‘kick Evra in the knee’ as claimed. There’s no video or photo evidence of it because there was no kick. Evra rolls round holding his knee but it was never kicked. From the video Suarez is behind him and appears to bend his knees behind Evra and Evra goes down clutching knee. The panel mentioned the kcik in a knee previously injured several times, yet there was no kick.


“At that point, they realised it would create more problems with media and public perception to acquit him that to punish him.”

This is a guess on your part . However, it’s ironic that the decision that they gave created (imo) far worse media and public perception both for themselves (FA), LFC, Suarez and Evra.

I’m not defending Suarez here, I think they were both as bad as each other, I’m criticising the system used.

 

Filthy gypo

 

Filthy racist.

 

Lads, this has been a great debate PLEASE don't bandy personal insults.

Lets keep the thread open eh?

ENJOY

 

Finally you agree.

 

Yep,I knew you were as described when i saw you racially abuse the Gypsies.

 

This can only get worse!

 

.