Luis Suarez

  • Please bear with us on the new site integration and fixing any known bugs over the coming days. If you can not log in please try resetting your password and check your spam box. If you have tried these steps and are still struggling email [email protected] with your username/registered email address
  • Log in now to remove adverts - no adverts at all to registered members!
I'm surprised at some comments on here.

Non of us know exactly what was said - the only people who do apart from the 2 players are the independant panel who found him guilty and maybe other witness statements such as other players or the ref.

There should be no condoning it or claiming he made non racist remarks as the panel are certain he clearly did. On appeal it may be overturned but that is doubtful; I do think it will be reduced to 5 or 6 games though.

....and he still has another charge to come doesn't he?
 
Look at the evidence:-
Was he sent off? If the ref had heard racist agravation he was obliged to send him off.
Man U players told Evra to wise up, did they feel racist remarks were goin on? Was there a flare up between the teams as you'd expect in a charged affair (United vs Liverpool) if there was a just cause such as racism/
Does Evra have a track record of making accusations about racism?
Knowledge of the south american culture is racism likely?
All of the above add up to Evra crying wolf and Suarez being victimised. I'd be interested to hear what John Barnes might say on the issue knowing his history and the abuse he suffered in his playing days.....
 
There are arguments to be had over whether the punishment is overly crude or draconian given the context in which it happened, or whether the context was an aggravating factor.

What I will say is that if someone at the top of the FA took this stance on diving, football fans would take it upon themselves to personally weave and lay red carpet for every inch of ground that he or she walked on.
 
I don't know if Suarez is guilty or not, and am not going to speculate either way.

However, if found guilty for the offence of racial abuse on the football pitch then an 8 match ban is fully justified. I'm not sure why some people are struggling with the distinction between this case and the crime. Any player found guilty of racist abuse should get the same regardless of whether they themselves are white, black, hispanic or anything else.
 
No struggle at all, just disagree with the verdict, I know the culture and speak better latin american spanish than any on that committee, i'm 98% sure Suarez is the agrieved party in this case.
 
aberdeenhornet said:
The problem with your argument wy is that it is not a racially based term!!! It was used to wind up as it got a reaction same way I'd call somebody a short arse, lightweight, prima donna or the like. The misunderstanding of the tongue of the issuer of the windup is the problem here allied to the garlic munching surrender monkeys attitude. Now that is racist against the French but does it harm? I've got a frog sitting 7ft from me and there is no problem with it, maybe thats because hes rugby and not footie....
Click to expand...

But it is a racially based term, it is stating that he is a Negro. In itself it may not be abusive as it is not abusive in English to call a black person black, but when it used in an abusive manner and surely you are not claiming that Suarez was having some friendly banter? then it becomes racial abuse, that is the law and what the FA have decided. Drawing a parallel to calling a Frenchman a Frog is not valid as the French are not a different race, they are a different nationality and as far as I am aware there is no laws against nationalist abuse, just as there are no laws against heightest or fattest abuse. I am just stating that both Suarez and that scum bag Terry have broken the laws of this country and the laws of their own sport and should thus be punished accordingly - and yes, I therefore also think that Suarez should be prosecuted for his racial abuse.
 
It means little black but is never a term of abuse and i mean never. Negro is a colour, black. What you're not picking up is the context and meaning of the word. The way we greet each other in S America often refers to where somebody comes from e.g. epale maracucho or some descriptive feature e.g. oye blancito, these are not racist terms. I believe with decent council he'll rightly beat this charge and the FA will once again be left with egg on their faces. I really cannot see it as racial abuse and as I say Evra has some serious chips on his shoulders and has cried racism before. He's just the sort of person I despise whether they be black white or any colour in between, he's basically a short arsed twat and thats ok as its not racist just an accurate description, if i add his colour into the equation do i then become a racist? As you may gather I have friends and family of all colours and many races and I wouldn't personally call Evra Negrito as it is a friendly term, I'd call him hijo de puta madre maricon......
 
"if i add his colour into the equation do i then become a racist?" Yes, unfortunately it does - and even your background would not stop you being prosecuted if you said it...It is not justification to say that coming from a different culture makes it OK, these are the laws and regulations of this country and they are by what all of us are bound. I will give you another parallel to see how that sits - in many latin countries the age of consent is very much lower than here, for instance in Spain it is 13. So would it be a good argument if a Spanish footballer had sex with a 13 year old that it was Ok as that was the custom in Spain?
 
WY as we're quoting law can you point me in the direction of the law on racism/racist abuse, definition of racism etc.? I believe its not cut and dry black and white but there is a large amount of context and intent involved but am willing to be corrected. There's as massive difference between physical fact and perceived intent so the analogy of age of consent is completely irrelevent. Add to this I'm not suggesting that racism is acceptable in any of the latin american countries I've had significant exposure to, what I don't understand that you and others aren't getting is that the term used isn't racist any more than somebody calling me bigman...
 
Aberdeen, I do not know the exact Law, but it is a fact that in this country you cannot abuse or discriminate against somebody based on race or sexuality - this is why Terry has been charged with a "racially aggravated public order offence." So if a charge had been brought against Suarez, it would have been on a similar basis. There was no perceived intent with Suarez, he openly admitted using the term many times to Evra. As you state above, the term means "Little Black", so if said in these circumstances i.e. shouting at each other in the heat of a football match then in this country it is seen as racial abuse. We are not talking about a couple of mates have a drink together in Latin America and laughing and joking using a term that means something different in that culture - we are talking about a heated local derby with 2 people shouting at each other....point I am making is that the term includes "Black" and to a black person it means you are referring to his race. Calling someone big man or small man or fat man or ginger man is not relevant as there are no laws or football regulations that forbid it...but abuse someone and include their race, then you are bang to rights...it might not be equitable or logical, but those are the laws and regulations that we are all bound by.
 
If he had shot him , or maimed him or finished his career I could understand the furore , as it is, I`m sorry if this upsets some folk ,but it is much ado about nothing!
 
aberdeenhornet said:
It means little black but is never a term of abuse and i mean never. Negro is a colour, black. What you're not picking up is the context and meaning of the word. The way we greet each other in S America often refers to where somebody comes from e.g. epale maracucho or some descriptive feature e.g. oye blancito, these are not racist terms. I believe with decent council he'll rightly beat this charge and the FA will once again be left with egg on their faces. I really cannot see it as racial abuse and as I say Evra has some serious chips on his shoulders and has cried racism before. He's just the sort of person I despise whether they be black white or any colour in between, he's basically a short arsed twat and thats ok as its not racist just an accurate description, if i add his colour into the equation do i then become a racist? As you may gather I have friends and family of all colours and many races and I wouldn't personally call Evra Negrito as it is a friendly term, I'd call him hijo de puta madre maricon......
Click to expand...

He's not in his country Abers, he's in ours. In our country, i'm sure he's well aware that the word is defamatory, and abusive, and if he isn't, it's the club's fault for not letting him know that. It's irrelevant how the word is used in his country, he's not playing football there!
 
Norwayhornet said:
If he had shot him , or maimed him or finished his career I could understand the furore , as it is, I`m sorry if this upsets some folk ,but it is much ado about nothing!
Click to expand...

i find that sad Norway, sorry. Racism isn't 'nothing'. Racism killed 6 million Jews in WW2. Racism kills all over the world, all the time. Racism, treated as lightly as you, others and Liverpool football club are treating it, is dangerous. Whether you regards Suarez as racist or not, he has been found to be racist, and therefore, what he said cannot be condoned. It breeds hate, and hate is a very disturbing thing.
 
H this is a matter of one soccer player calling another, has absolutely nothing to do with killing 6 million people ! The point that some people are trying to say is that Suarez hasnt done anything racist , he has been tried by a bunch of inept FA idiots! ,If anything you should be siding with him ,until he is proved guilty in a court of law!
Aberdeen is right , there will be an appeal and common sense will win through!, If not it will go Legal and the laws of the land will find that he is not guilty .The FA will be made to look the chumps that they are (again....).
 
Hornette_TID said:
He's not in his country Abers, he's in ours. In our country, i'm sure he's well aware that the word is defamatory, and abusive, and if he isn't, it's the club's fault for not letting him know that. It's irrelevant how the word is used in his country, he's not playing football there!
Click to expand...

Its not, it doesnt exist in the english language, i see the use as possibly belittling in this context but its not racist. A normal guy with balls wouldn't have taken it as negative. Anyway I'm tired of this I know the sentiment etc and the guy is innocent end of. Its racial cultural misunderstandings that lead to racial conflicts, a bit of effort to understand and not take the stance we're brits you're in our country how we interpret your action is gospel is wrong.
 
Hornette_TID said:
i find that sad Norway, sorry. Racism isn't 'nothing'. Racism killed 6 million Jews in WW2. Racism kills all over the world, all the time. Racism, treated as lightly as you, others and Liverpool football club are treating it, is dangerous. Whether you regards Suarez as racist or not, he has been found to be racist, and therefore, what he said cannot be condoned. It breeds hate, and hate is a very disturbing thing.
Click to expand...

Yes and criminal how the FA cover up for clubs when their players end opposition players careers behind closed doors in "friendly" matches, assault charges mmmmm
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Top Bottom
Back